Le jeudi 26 octobre 2017 11:57:44 UTC+2, Erik Bray a écrit :
>
> On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 6:31 PM, Emmanuel Charpentier 
> <[email protected] <javascript:>> 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.


So do I ;-). But some people think it is important, and they may have a use 
case where they are right.
 

> 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*.
>

This I understood. I'm just 
a) extremely skeptic about the possibility of haviog the R Core Team 
reverse its decision, and
b) skeptic about the usefulness of reversing a decision tha aims to offr a 
(slightly) enhanced security.

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. 
>

Indeed : I'm relying on people with knowledge of Mac OS X and its 
shenanigans (a. k. a. "our Mac heads") for that.

PS : since I've modified my plans 
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sage-devel/fsbMaBe1jU8/cMK_pbFxBwAJ> a 
bit, I'll need to give a hint to people who insist on building Sage 
(including R) without OpenSSL. That was my point in suggesting a dedicated 
branch. Do you have alternatives to suggest ?

Sincerely yurs,

--
Emmanuel Charpentier

-- 
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.

Reply via email to