On Saturday, 14 April 2012 16:47:15 UTC+8, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
>
> On 2012-04-14 07:10, William Stein wrote:
> > Regarding (3), there is already an openssl optional package, FWIW.
> I think with (3) he meant: make it such that the flask-notebook works
> without OpenSSL.
>
indeed, I meant to sa
On 2012-04-14 07:10, William Stein wrote:
> Regarding (3), there is already an openssl optional package, FWIW.
I think with (3) he meant: make it such that the flask-notebook works
without OpenSSL.
--
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this gro
On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 9:46 PM, Dima Pasechnik wrote:
> Has there been any conclusion reached on this?
> Should Sage
> 1) Require openssl?
> 2) Provide openssl
> 3) make openssl optional?
> In particular this is relevant to sagenb (#11080)
>
> (1 is the easiest, 2 might have licensing issues, 3 n
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 2:01 PM, Keshav Kini wrote:
> Jonathan Bober writes:
>> Actually, the code base of psage is not "deeply connected" to sage. It
>> really is just a python library that more or less depends on "all" of
>> sage being present. (Or at least a lot of sage.) It could probably
>>
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 10:28 AM, Keshav Kini wrote:
> I guess Purple Sage will have to switch to git when Sage does, since
> their code bases are deeply connected. lmfdb, which I hadn't heard of
> before, looks to be a separate codebase (like sagenb is). Is it
> switching to git too? If not, then
On Tuesday, March 20, 2012 6:19:18 PM UTC+1, William wrote:
>
> ? Can you provide a reference?
>
ah, you are right, sorry. i guess i have mixed this up with some other
custom license.
h
--
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, s
On 20 March 2012 17:17, William Stein wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 1:13 PM, Keshav Kini wrote:
>> John Cremona writes:
>>> Indeed: every time I build my working copy of Sage (not counting test
>>> version here) I have to do first sage -i openssl and then sage -f
>>> python to rebuild python
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 1:14 PM, Harald Schilly
wrote:
>
>
> On Tuesday, March 20, 2012 6:05:41 PM UTC+1, John Cremona wrote:
>> … openssl …
>
> the basic problem is this clause in their license:
> """
>
> All advertising materials mentioning features or use of this
> *software must display t
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 1:13 PM, Keshav Kini wrote:
> John Cremona writes:
>> Indeed: every time I build my working copy of Sage (not counting test
>> version here) I have to do first sage -i openssl and then sage -f
>> python to rebuild python. Otherwise some mercurial stuff does not
>> work (
On Tuesday, March 20, 2012 6:05:41 PM UTC+1, John Cremona wrote:
> … openssl …
the basic problem is this clause in their license:
"""
All advertising materials mentioning features or use of this
*software must display the following acknowledgment:
"This product includes software developed
On 20 March 2012 16:39, leif wrote:
>
> I thought HTTPS (which requires SSL of course) wasn't strictly needed
> in Sage, but since it is omnipresent (many Python packages use it), it
> doesn't make sense to not have it. I.e., people frequently happen to
> notice they don't have _ssl *after* they
Okay, maybe Python's hashlib builds if you don't have OpenSSL on your
system. However, it *fails* if you do have an OpenSSL library but it
can't be linked.
I consider this to be a bug in Python. Put some random file at
/usr/lib/libssl.so and Python thinks you have OpenSSL installed. This
will c
12 matches
Mail list logo
