> On Dec 28, 2018, at 1:31 PM, Gilles <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 28 Dec 2018 13:18:41 -0500, Rob Tompkins wrote:
>> Yes. I agree that makes sense. It is a considerable amount of work to
>> do that migration in a single go. So, I’m not sure if we should go at
>> it piecemeal or as a complete lump of work.
>>
>> -Rob
>>
>>> On Dec 28, 2018, at 11:41 AM, Jochen Wiedmann <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Weren't we going to fo that for *all* of our projects?
>
> I also did not understand the purpose of yet another vote.
>
> AFAIUC, the vote (for _all_ components) passed.
> Hence anyone with some time can file an INFRA request asking
> for the migration of a component of his choice.
>
> Or am I missing something?
That last list of components were the components in git-wip that infra required
us to move to gitbox. [codec] remains in SVN. I could have missed our having
record of all components going to gitbox. Pardon if I did miss that. If we
don’t have such a [VOTE] on all svn components, I’m quite happy to retract this
[VOTE] en leu of that (and am willing to do the vote).
-Rob
>
> Gilles
>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Dec 28, 2018 at 4:17 PM Pascal Schumacher
>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> +1
>>>>
>>>>> Am 28.12.2018 um 15:51 schrieb Rob Tompkins:
>>>>> After doing the 1.12 release I propose we move commons-codec to gitbox.
>>>>> This is a [LAZY] consensus [VOTE] for doing such after I get through the
>>>>> release. This [LAZY][VOTE] will be open for at least 72 hours form now.
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>> -Rob
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
