On 13.07.2015 18:39, Konstantin Boudnik wrote: > Sha1 file format is also wrong again. It's very frustrating to keep asking to > fix it for last 6 months. I'm abstaining from the vote > > -0 [binding]
Cos, whilst I agree that it's painful to have to repeat the same nitpick over and over again (and I find it inconceivable that competent developers can't figure out the sha1sum and md5sum commands, even on Windows), I really can't agree that the issue is important enough to abstain from a vote. Please consider reconsidering. :) -- Brane > > Cos > > > On July 13, 2015 7:31:23 AM PDT, Dmitriy Setrakyan <[email protected]> > wrote: >> I think we should just stop using MD5 Hash and just keep using SHA1. In >> my >> experience, the MD5 format is different on different operating systems, >> while the SHA1 works the same in most of the cases. >> >> D. >> >> On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 7:09 AM, Yakov Zhdanov <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> I'll take a look. Thanks, Brane! >>> >>> --Yakov >>> >>> 2015-07-13 11:27 GMT+03:00 Branko Čibej <[email protected]>: >>> >>>> On 12.07.2015 08:18, Branko Čibej wrote: >>>>> On 11.07.2015 02:00, Konstantin Boudnik wrote: >>>>>> On Sat, Jul 11, 2015 at 01:56AM, Yakov Zhdanov wrote: >>>>>>> Dear Sirs! >>>>>> If you're trying to please IPMC gramma-busybodies with this - >> don't >>>> bother: >>>>>> they will find a reason why that isn't an appropriate way to >> address >>>> them ;) >>>>> I'm more interested in why 1.3.0-rc1 is still in dist/dev. You >> should >>>>> really immediately delete packages that aren't candidates for >> release, >>>>> anything else just creates confusion. >>>> Sigh. The SHA1 and MD5 file format is still wrong. Please either >> look it >>>> up if you're faking the format, or use the correct tools to >> generate it. >>>> Specifically, there should be two spaces between the hash and the >> file >>>> name. >>>> >>>> -- Brane >>>>
