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 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Bdale
pgpdSNhYuAB4z.pgp
Description: PGP signature
