hash for feisty on the md5sum page

[Thierry Destinobles]

the hashes for the feisty iso are missing

i know it's still alpha, but it could be handy for the ones testing this stuff

[Matthew East (mdke)]

Thanks for your bug.

[Matthew East (mdke)]

Having thought about this a bit, I don't think we should do it. It will make the page quite long to include hashes for each Feisty milestone release (and potentially each daily release) and we don't need to clutter it up. It will require too much maintenance to keep it updated.

Also, Feisty is not supported until it is released.

[Simon Michael (simon)]

This bug should now be upgraded.
Please add the http://releases.ubuntu.com/7.04/ md5 sums to https://help.ubuntu.com/community/UbuntuHashes .

[Colin Watson (cjwatson)]

Gah, how irritating. Why does this page even exist? It should be links to the appropriate URLs on releases.ubuntu.com and old-releases.ubuntu.com.

[Lorenzo (lorenzo-delledonne)]

Why this bug has been Rejected??? When trying to download the new Feisty release, I ran across to https://help.ubuntu.com/community/UbuntuHashes, following a link from the front page!
It should be updated or replaced with something else!

[Cory (cory-deppen)]

The UbunutuHashes page still doesn't show the correct MD5 hash for Feisty. Will it be updated?

[Matthew East (mdke)]

Colin - the page exists because we were informed by several users that it was not appropriate to only have the hashes on a non-secure website. After discussion with James Troup, we decided the best solution was to have the hashes on a secure (https) website, and hit upon the documentation wiki as a solution.

[Colin Watson (cjwatson)]

Matthew: the users in question obviously didn't notice MD5SUMS.gpg right alongside MD5SUMS, which (if you care enough to check it) is probably considerably more secure than HTTPS certificates. Who ever bothers to check the full HTTPS certificate chain?

[Colin Watson (cjwatson)]

Also, if you check MD5SUMS.gpg you can guarantee that the hashes in MD5SUMS could only have been modified by the very small number of people with access to the cdimage master machine (exactly the same people who can modify the published ISO images), whereas help.ubuntu.com/community can be edited by considerably more people. I desperately want people NOT to be in the habit of trusting hashes published on a wiki page.