From owner-svn-ports-all@freebsd.org Mon Jan 27 06:25:04 2020 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-ports-all@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 91989233446; Mon, 27 Jan 2020 06:25:04 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from danfe@freebsd.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [96.47.72.132]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "freefall.freebsd.org", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 485fqh3N6Kz40sm; Mon, 27 Jan 2020 06:25:04 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from danfe@freebsd.org) Received: by freefall.freebsd.org (Postfix, from userid 1033) id 63B5B1B67F; Mon, 27 Jan 2020 06:25:04 +0000 (UTC) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2020 06:25:04 +0000 From: Alexey Dokuchaev To: "Tobias C. Berner" Cc: Jan Beich , ports-committers , svn-ports-all , svn-ports-head , gecko@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r524241 - head/databases/sqlite3 Message-ID: <20200127062504.GA47080@FreeBSD.org> References: <202001270533.00R5XDkT049821@repo.freebsd.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-BeenThere: svn-ports-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: SVN commit messages for the ports tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2020 06:25:04 -0000 On Mon, Jan 27, 2020 at 07:19:00AM +0100, Tobias C. Berner wrote: > There is talk upstream of no longer supporting system sqlite in the > future. But that goes against encouraged practices (to avoid bundled libraries), what's their rationale for going the wrong way? > So this might be the best way forward. > > What's gecko@'s opinion on this? It would be nice if this matter was sorted out *before* bumping of the port epoch. :-( ./danfe