Re: Draft ballot

[Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk>]

Kurt Roeckx writes ("Draft ballot"):
> [   ] Choice 1: Focus on systemd
> [   ] Choice 2: Systemd but we support exploring alternatives
> [   ] Choice 3: Support for multiple init systems is Important
> [   ] Choice 4: Support non-systemd systems, without blocking progress
> [   ] Choice 5: Support for multiple init systems is Required
> [   ] Choice 6: Support portability and multiple implementations
> [   ] Choice 7: Further Discussion

Obviously this is the draft before G+D.  I had a question, though:

May we reorder this when we send in our ballots, for example:

> [ 1  ] Choice 7: Further Discussion
> [ 2  ] Choice 5: Support for multiple init systems is Required
> [ 3  ] Choice 3: Support for multiple init systems is Important
> [ 4  ] Choice 2: Systemd but we support exploring alternatives
> [ 5  ] Choice 6: Support portability and multiple implementations
> [ 6  ] Choice 4: Support non-systemd systems, without blocking progress
> [ 7  ] Choice 1: Focus on systemd

supposedly from some mad person who really likes prime-numbered
options, and therefore ranks FD first because 7 is the biggest prime.

If this is supported it makes voting a lot less confusing.  I just
wanted to check that this ballot will be interpreted the "obvious"
way.

If it is not supported, will it at least be detected ?

Thanks,
Ian.

-- 
Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk>   These opinions are my own.

If I emailed you from an address @fyvzl.net or @evade.org.uk, that is
a private address which bypasses my fierce spamfilter.