Hopefully after OpenBSD gets done modernizing and simplifying the core code they will start working together on system support with a sane compatibility layer system. Either way, my hat off to the OpenBSD guys for taking on this much needed task.
Ok. OpenTLS is a better name.The licence states that forks cannot be named with the word "OpenSSL" included. But OpenTLS or BSDSSL/BSDTLS would've worked.
No because the devs of OpenSSL do not have secure good code in mind or they are just not as good as the openbsd folks. Also some people committing to OpenSSL may be working for someone else and can not be really trusted.Forking OpenSSL to provide a mostly OpenSSL compatible API is critical.
I was going to comment on this, and realized that this thread was beyond the help of any sane and reasonable individual.
Do you guys get paid to toll this forum? Seriously, what gives?
The reality is that this is a natural and progressive part of the software ecosystem. Much of the software I'm using to make this post (OS, Browser) was a 'fork' of some prior piece of software. Much of the software and infrastructure used to host this forum was a fork of some previous software as well.
Haters need to stop hating.