[OT] New keyserver

[V. Alex Brennen]

On Tue, 17 Sep 2002, Jan-Benedict Glaw wrote:

> 4. Is a new keyserver really what folks around would like to see? Is
> anybody more like "It's my baby, go away and do something else?" Or
> should we take current pksd and send patches as long as it's not 100%
> what's needed?
> 
> *Please* comment on this!

Well, CKS has most of the features I think you're looking for already 
implemented.  It uses postgres, and has the beginnings of database 
abstraction so that it can go against Berkeley db, or even oracle.

It seems a shame to re-duplicate all of that work.  Progress on CKS
has been slow lately, but I haven't gotten any patches.  If 
you where to put time into CKS, we'd be able to get a powerful 
stable keyserver faster.  And we could refocus the duplicated 
efforts on new features like respecting the 'no-modify' flag.

If there is something you don't like about CKS that is preventing
you from working on it, please let me know and I will most likely
be willing to change it.  I haven't rejected any patches submitted
by other yet.  If other people are willing to get very involved,
I'll set up CVS on my server for the project.

I am using other GPL'd code (from gpg) in the project, so I can't 
change the license unless we reimplement a number of things.

I do have someone who has offered to help me port the CKS to 
German.


	- VAB