Make Sum fields clearer.
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- Python
- Stars
- 4
- Forks
- 2
- PR merge metrics
- No merged PRs in 30d
Description
The ET-CTS committee found the sum="," notation idiosyncratic. One option:
"sum" = { "method" : "md5" , "value": "the checksum value" }
They also raised the slightly different notion of a signature that can accomplish the same thing as a checksum, while also confirming provenance. The suggestion is:
"signature" = { "method": "???" , "value": "the signature value" }
Currently, sum is a required field, but the proposal is to have one of sum or signature required.
Contributor guide
No contributing guide indexed for this repository
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Start by locating the message schema and validation for the current required sum field; no file or test is named in the issue. Review the proposed sum and signature representations and clarify the signature method and requirement before defining completion criteria.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- python
- Domain
- backend
- Issue type
- Feature
- Difficulty
- 5/5
- Estimated time
- Over a week
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Needs clarification
- Newbie friendliness
- 20/100