Comment # 2
on bug 12058
from Pierre Fortin
(In reply to Michael Mann from comment #1)
> Isn't that technically correct? Since they aren't validated it's unknown
> whether they are good or bad. Are you expecting a third state of "not
> validated"?
Why be verbose to this extent?:
true false
good - X
bad - X
when checksum = {good|bad} suffices?
This is already tri-state:
[- X] v. [X -] v. [- -]
[- X] [- -] [X -]
Why is there any textual output?
Why not simply use colored highlighting:
yellow: validation disabled
green: checksum ok (optional)
red: checksum bad
similar to other errors that produce highlighting?
You are receiving this mail because:
- You are watching all bug changes.