Hi, I'm -1 for this due to the things that popped up with the latest Camel release. [1] Even though I do not fully understand why this is an issue, cause when releasing OPS4j artefacts we never had such issues.
If this issues is cleared I'd go for +1 regards, Achim [1] - http://camel.465427.n5.nabble.com/VOTE-Release-Apache-Camel-2-10-5-tp5734607p5734684.html 2013/6/25 Andreas Pieber <anpie...@gmail.com> > hey, there is no 0 option :-) > > still +1 for the switch. Would make forking and experimenting (and > especially getting the changes back) so much easier... > > Kind regards, > Andreas > > > On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 11:12 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <j...@nanthrax.net > >wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > to follow the discussion that we had some weeks ago, I start here a > formal > > vote to migrate our scm from svn to git. > > > > Please vote to approve this switch: > > > > [ ] +1 Approve the switch (from svn to git) > > [ ] -1 Do not approve the switch (please provide specific comments) > > > > This vote will be open for 72 hours. > > > > Thanks, > > Regards > > JB > > -- > > Jean-Baptiste Onofré > > jbono...@apache.org > > http://blog.nanthrax.net > > Talend - http://www.talend.com > > > -- Apache Karaf <http://karaf.apache.org/> Committer & PMC OPS4J Pax Web <http://wiki.ops4j.org/display/paxweb/Pax+Web/> Committer & Project Lead OPS4J Pax for Vaadin <http://team.ops4j.org/wiki/display/PAXVAADIN/Home> Commiter & Project Lead blog <http://notizblog.nierbeck.de/>
