I'm not sure what the process is. Sent from my iPad
> On Aug 10, 2014, at 1:25 PM, Matt Sicker <[email protected]> wrote: > > Oh, I didn't find that part. Also, I wasn't sure which voting method this > sort of vote might require. If that makes it +3 to switch to Git, then it > looks like we can ask INFRA to help us out? > > >> On 10 August 2014 14:51, Ralph Goers <[email protected]> wrote: >> Matt, after reading our own guidelines I think your vote should count since >> you initiated the vote. >> >> Sent from my iPad >> >>> On Aug 10, 2014, at 12:41 PM, Ralph Goers <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Does this really require 3 + 1 votes from PMC members? >>> >>> Sent from my iPad >>> >>>> On Aug 10, 2014, at 8:27 AM, Matt Sicker <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> Votes cast: >>>> >>>> +1 Matt Sicker >>>> +1 Scott Deboy >>>> +1 Remko Popma >>>> +0 Ralph Goers >>>> -0 Gary Gregory >>>> +1 Bruno Mahe >>>> -0 Dominik Psenner >>>> >>>> There are no guidelines I found about which process this would follow, so >>>> let's say it used the Lazy Consensus method. Then we have: >>>> >>>> +1 Scott >>>> +1 Remko >>>> +0 Ralph >>>> -0 Gary >>>> >>>> Based on PMC votes, it looks like this doesn't pass for now. We'll be >>>> sticking with Subversion. >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Matt Sicker <[email protected]> > > > > -- > Matt Sicker <[email protected]>
