3 ms·
While the fissure you describe as a guaranteed outcome is certainly likely in many such scenarios, you're missing the point: Implementing a standard without re
by floatingatoll 8y ago
While the fissure you describe as a guaranteed outcome is certainly likely in many such scenarios, you're missing the point:
Implementing a standard without regard for the beliefs of other implementors is an action that supports a standard. Refusing to work with others does not implicitly harm a standard.
You assert that refusing to cooperate with another implementor is guaranteed to harm a standard. It is not guaranteed at all.
DJB has not destroyed DNS. BoringSSL has not destroyed TLS. A thousand reimplementations of standards in Rust have not destroyed a thousand standards.
You clearly believe that Cloudflare is acting in bad faith, and are constructing a worldview out of assumptions that you declare instead are facts. While I respect your right to hold those views, I do not respect your declaration of future outcomes as fact.
- tw04 8y ago>DJB has not destroyed DNS. DJB didn't fork Bind and then refuse to work with them. >BoringSSL has not destroyed TLS BoringSSL didn't fork OpenSSL and then refuse to work with them. About the closest modern comparison would be OpenOffice vs. LibreOffice - which created a complete mess like I mentioned before. Except even THAT is a bad comparison because LibreOffice only forked when they were FORCED to fork.
- floatingatoll 8y agoI was unable to parse this reply in the context of "do forks harm standards?" as we're discussing in this thread. What standard came to harm as a result of LibreOffice forking from OpenOffice?