Hacker News Reader

Shouldn't it say LibreSSL - An OpenSSL fork :)? Seems cool that we kinda have a choice, and do not need to depend on one OpenSource project to have SSL, on other hand it seems it will be another underfunded project, waiting for another heartbleed to happen. :)

View on HN

They're aiming at binary compatibility, as such it is a replacement (but also a fork). Similar to MariaDB v.s. MySQL.

Fork and replacement are not mutually exclusive. In fact I'd think that often forks start with the intention to provide a replacement.

On the positive side, and assuming sufficient divergence by then, at least that will only affect about half of the ssl web instead of nearly all of it.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com