Hashes wiki page

[Doug Smythies]

On 2104.09.09 04:48 David Symons wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 9:34 AM, Doug Smythies <dsmythies at telus.net> wrote:
>> On 2104.09.08 15:57 Colin Watson wrote:
>> On Mon, Sep 08, 2014 at 03:24:00PM -0700, Elizabeth K. Joseph wrote:
>>> On Mon, Sep 8, 2014 at 3:06 PM, Doug Smythies <dsmythies at telus.net> wrote:
>>>> For obvious reasons the hashes web page [1] is not editable by everyone.
>>>> It is also not regularly maintained, leading to many bug reports
>>>> (8 so far, since 14.04.1).
>>>>
>>>> Is there someone on this list with higher than normal wiki powers,
>>>> that has sufficient rights to edit the page, that can help us with
>>>> the bug report [2].

> I've updated the page with the 14.04.1 hashes (and closed the bug).
> Hopefully taking that pressure off while discussion on an alternative
> approach continues.

O.K. thanks very much.
In one respect, that will give some breathing room, as you mention.
In another respect it doesn't, because the 12.04.5 hashes are not there either.
However, all recent complaints have been about 14.04.1.

>>>> We want to delete the entire content and have the page refer
>>>> the user to the real location for the hashes.

> If someone puts the proposed wording together I can put it up.

I'll give it a try soon. It is actually a little confusing trying to
follow around the other references.
 
>>>>
>>>> Gunnar has pointed out (off-list) that it may be desirable to
>>>> do some collateral editing on [3], and that maybe [3] and [4]
>>>> should be combined.
>>>>
>>>> Myself, I just want to get rid of this re-occurring issue, as it
>>>> comes up every release and point release.
>>>>
>>>> [1] https://help.ubuntu.com/community/UbuntuHashes
>>>> [2] https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ubuntu-docs/+bug/1349715
>>>> [3] https://help.ubuntu.com/community/HowToMD5SUM
>>>> [4] https://help.ubuntu.com/community/VerifyIsoHowto
>>>
>>> It looks like this was historically maintained by the Ubuntu release
>>> team, including Colin (who has updated it last) and Stéphane (on the
>>> release team) on this thread to get their opinion. I don't want to
>>> just alter/delete it if they continue to find value in it and can
>>> commit to keeping it updated.

>> We do occasionally remember to update it, but my August was pretty busy.
>> I've long thought that it shouldn't exist, and have only maintained it
>> under sufferance; if you folks want to get rid of it and refactor the
>> corresponding documentation to suggest better things, then I will do a
>> little happy dance.

> Having now done it just the once, I now empathise. :-)
 
>> I think [3] and [4] likely need to be sorted out
>>  first though.

I don't. I think [1] can be done before [3] and [4] are sorted out.
Don't get me wrong, [3] and [4] need to be sorted out. I just don't
see it as a prerequisite.