Re: [sage-devel] Re: VOTE: inclusion of OpenSSL in Sage

Hi, Le 25/10/2017 à 00:08, Eric Gourgoulhon a écrit : > Le mardi 24 octobre 2017 20:58:17 UTC+2, Emmanuel Charpentier a écrit : > > > It is true. But we are hoisted by our own petard : from our tutorial > : > "The Sage down

Re: [sage-devel] Re: VOTE: inclusion of OpenSSL in Sage

On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 3:08 PM Eric Gourgoulhon wrote: > Thanks Emmanuel for the discussion summary. > > > Le mardi 24 octobre 2017 20:58:17 UTC+2, Emmanuel Charpentier a écrit : >> >> >> It is true. But we are hoisted by our own petard : from our tutorial >>

[sage-devel] Re: VOTE: inclusion of OpenSSL in Sage

Thanks Emmanuel for the discussion summary. Le mardi 24 octobre 2017 20:58:17 UTC+2, Emmanuel Charpentier a écrit : > > > It is true. But we are hoisted by our own petard : from our tutorial > : > "The Sage download file comes with “bat

Re: [sage-devel] Re: VOTE: inclusion of OpenSSL in Sage

On 24 October 2017 at 15:51, Emmanuel Charpentier < emanuel.charpent...@gmail.com> wrote: > Final tally > > Yes, we should fully support OpenSSL now, and clarify the licensing issue > : 9 unambiguous votes : > > > > No, we should wait until OpenSSL finishes fixing their license situation > fo

Re: [sage-devel] Re: broken docbuild in SageMath 8.1.beta9

> On 25/10/2017, at 10:35, Eric Gourgoulhon wrote: > > It seems to me (but I may be wrong) that building the doc requires two runs, > like latex: during the first pass, all references are collected and are > listed as "undefined" if the anchor has not been encountered yet; it is only > durin

[sage-devel] Re: broken docbuild in SageMath 8.1.beta9

It seems to me (but I may be wrong) that building the doc requires two runs, like latex: during the first pass, all references are collected and are listed as "undefined" if the anchor has not been encountered yet; it is only during the second run that all references are correctly resolved. It

Re: [sage-devel] Re: VOTE: inclusion of OpenSSL in Sage

Le mardi 24 octobre 2017 21:34:18 UTC+2, Jeroen Demeyer a écrit : > > On 2017-10-24 20:58, Emmanuel Charpentier wrote: > > A non-communicating R in Sage can be very useful if you are not using R > > in Sage at all > > I just meant to say that if you don't use R, then it's fine to have a > non

Re: [sage-devel] Re: VOTE: inclusion of OpenSSL in Sage

On 2017-10-24 20:58, Emmanuel Charpentier wrote: A non-communicating R in Sage can be very useful if you are not using R in Sage at all I just meant to say that if you don't use R, then it's fine to have a non-communicating R. I admit that the wording was a bit cryptic. -- You received this

[sage-devel] Re: VOTE: inclusion of OpenSSL in Sage

*Abstract of discussions* In this mammooth of a thread (11 post so far) in answer to call for vote, there have been a lot of interesting remarks and discussions. They have touched various domains, and are difficult to summarize easily. I have chosen to group these reactions by theme, and to qu

[sage-devel] sage-diversity

Dear All, We made a sage-diversity mailing list for for women, minorities, LGBTQ+ community members, and allies interested in using and developing SageMath. In particular, we will use this group to advertise Women in Sage Days. Please join if you are interested: https://groups.google.com/for

[sage-devel] Re: VOTE: inclusion of OpenSSL in Sage

Final tally While I wasn't able to retrieve Eroik's message where he changed his vote, his request is consistent with his remarls. Hence the final tally : Yes, we should fully support OpenSSL now, and clarify the licensing issue : 9 unambiguous votes : Dima Pasechnik

Re: [sage-devel] Re: VOTE: inclusion of OpenSSL in Sage

On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 6:31 PM, Dima Pasechnik wrote: > There are various https-only software repos, not only Python or R-relayed. > IIRC kernel.org is one of them. Without SSL headers one cannot build tools to > access such repos; e.g. there are no such headers in Xcode. > One may keep repeati