[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#341839: Call for vote: coreutils: md5sum output format

I hereby call for an immediate TC vote on the question of what md5sum's
output format should be, requested by bug #341839.  

As Anthony noted in his early March summary of open issues, the current 
md5sum behavior matches the formats used by upstream, and by related tools 
such as sha1sum, sha256sum, and sha512sum.  He suggested that we should 
rescind the previous TC decision in favor of existing practice, which means 
ranking choice 2 on this ballot first.

Since this vote may overrule a developer, 6.1.3 of our Constitution requires
a 3:1 majority of the TC for choice 1.  However, a simple majority will 
suffice for choice 2 to defeat further discussion.

  In the brackets next to your preferred choice, place a 1. Place a 2 in
  the brackets next to your next choice.  Continue until you reach your last
  choice.  Do not enter a number smaller than 1 or larger than 3.  You may
  skip numbers.  You may rank options equally (as long as all choices X you
  make fall in the range 1 <= X <= 3).

  To vote "no, no matter what" rank "Further discussion" as more
  desirable than the unacceptable choices, or You may rank the "Further
  discussion" choice, and leave choices you consider unacceptable
  blank. Unranked choices are considered equally the least desired
  choices, and ranked below all ranked choices. (Note: if the Further
  Discussion choice is unranked, then it is equal to all other unranked
  choices, if any.)

- - -=-=-=-=-=- Don't Delete Anything Between These Lines =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
[   ] Choice 1: the output of md5sum should be changed as per bug #341839
[   ] Choice 2: the output of md5sum should not change despite bug #341839
[   ] Choice 3: Further discussion
- - -=-=-=-=-=- Don't Delete Anything Between These Lines =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-


Attachment: pgpRp6pqHReXp.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: