Re: [Sks-devel] New Debian Binary Replacement

[Jeffrey Johnson]

On May 18, 2012, at 4:43 PM, Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote:

> 
> I have started pondering on policy regarding a possible fork and its
> criteria for inclusion in the main pool of sks-keyservers.net
> 

Do these questions need explicit answers?

Even if an answer for how to handle version forks were
specified, is there any reason to believe that anyone
on a "fork" is going to comply with the specification?

And wouldn't patience to see whether there actually
is a SKS fork, with a need to specify forked version pool acceptance
criteria, perhaps with administrative delegation to inter-continental
and inter-national naming authorities, registered/distributed through DNS,
with creepy-toe certificate compliance, and more … wouldn't
a bit of patience be more prudent than this continued stoopid thread?

Survival of the fittest … forks usually suffer the same fate as genetic 
mutations.

73 de Keff