On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 6:31 PM, Emmanuel Charpentier <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Le mercredi 25 octobre 2017 18:10:02 UTC+2, Jeroen Demeyer a écrit : >> >> On 2017-10-25 18:01, Emmanuel Charpentier wrote: >> > Your inputs, please ? >> >> I think it is completely pointless. And it's never going to work in >> practice... nobody is going to want to maintain that branch. > > > Maybe people that think that it is oh, sooo important to be able to build > Sage without (Open)SSL support, that they want us to maintain patches > _agains_ software that _needs_ SSL ?
Hi there, No need for the exaggeration. I don't personally think it's so important to be able to build Sage without SSL support. For myself I don't care, because I will never be affected by this issue. As I keep saying R is the only package giving us any trouble at all at the moment, and in insisting that R should be able to build without SSL I'm only trying to help *you*. You don't want to have to "maintain a patch" and I'm just saying ideally nobody should have to patch R just to be able to build it without an effectively optional dependency :) Heck, go ahead even and drop that patch if you want, just as long as there are clear instructions for OSX users how to build. Best, Erik -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
