Normally I try to avoid getting into arguments about style and such, it's just bikeshedding. But if the OpenBSD people are going to clean up, review, audit, fix, improve and maintain this code, it makes all the sense to switch to a style they are used to and comfortable with. It also makes sense to nuke all the junk that gets in the way and which they will not and cannot test because it is not at all relevant to the platform.

Besides, the OpenSSL code is a fucking mess.

I spent a couple hours with the OpenSSL source last week, and agree that a major cleanup is necessary. This means

- Rip out unused stuff - Rip out stuff that obviously doesn't work - Make big cleanups

I've done this in the past with token-level tools to ensure that I wasn't breaking things.

OpenSSL desperately needed to have a bunch of garbage removed. It needs good tests, it needs to be slimmed down and made clean so that the code is readable and maintainable.

Frankly I wouldn't trust fixes to the old version anyway, given its state.

In software development it's often the case that the first claim is true, but the second isn't.

> Frankly I wouldn't trust fixes to the old version anyway, given its state.

It will be interesting to see if this get organized and properly funded, given this library's importance to international commerce.

> Frankly I wouldn't trust fixes to the old version anyway, given its state.

Clean slate! An admirable goal, and clearly the best solution. Let's see if this actually happens.