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 <ijack...@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.
