Yes, I'm referring to the github repository. I must assume that Darksend implements the coinjoin concept from scratch, otherwise it would not be legal or right to distribute the program in object form only.
I do have full respect for the decision of the developer to release the code as he sees fit, as long as it's a completely original work... but I also have a lot of admiration and respect for GPL licensing, and I believe it should be honored. Open source software is the primary foundation upon which this whole crypto thing is possible, and the licenses ensure the public benefit of the authors' contributions are not usurped by private interests.
I did some poking around, but I didn't find an answer to verify that Darksend is not based on GPL'd code... I assume that it is not, but I was hoping someone here would know for sure.
Here's my take on this: I'm a huge supporter of the open source movement, and I believe licenses and authors' work should be respected. I don't know whether Evan has used GPL code in his coinjoin implementation, but either way, he has stated his intention to open source it when it's fully functional. It should be noted that darksend is not currently included in the production release of darkcoin. I believe there are good reasons for keeping the darksend source closed until it's fully functional, and I respect that decision. I also believe the community should & will hold Evan to his stated intention of releasing the source when it's ready. If I were the author of any GPL code used in Darksend, I'd be totally fine with his approach, as long as it was open sourced upon the production release.
Wont this be part of the vetting process? We have gmaxwell confirmed, Kritov tweeted he'd love a bite at it, and with a cheery on top plus loads of luck A.A. (who I suspect is keeping a close eye on DRK), if he's not too busy auditing and giving talks all around the planet...