Re: [Sks-devel] "SKS is effectively running as end-of-life software at this point"?

[Jeremy T. Bouse]

On 2/6/2019 11:26 AM, Andrew Gallagher wrote:

> On 06/02/2019 13:11, Steffen Kaiser wrote:
>> Is it meant litterally? The current SKS project is end of life and,
>> effectively, we have to look into another direction? Other software, new
>> fork with rewrite?
> I said "effectively", not literally. And I was in a grumpy mood that
> day. But I stand by my point about design flaws not getting the
> attention they deserve. You don't need to fork the codebase to make
> improvements, but you do need to redesign the protocol to be
> abuse-resistant, which is a Very Hard Problem. If we had some consensus
> on the way forward it would be a good start.

If only it were open-source software and individuals with the extra time
and talent to work on those design flaws were able to do so. Wouldn't
that be a great world to live in?