as far as I know there's usually a vote on the dev@ list for first acceptance (and then it's referenced in the IP Clearance file), then the IP Clearance is done (including SGA, lazy consensus vote on general@incubator, etc.), and then finally code is committed if everything is fine. That's why I started this at first, and I think there's consensus around the need of an IP Clearance.
Tommaso 2013/11/13 Tobias Bocanegra <tri...@apache.org> > -1 (non binding) as no http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/ is > filed. this has to be done before voting for contribution. also, we > (Adobe) should also provide a software grant prior to this. > > Regards, Toby > > On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 5:07 AM, Justin Edelson > <jus...@justinedelson.com> wrote: > > +1 > > > > Agree with Bertrand and Dominik's comments 100%. > > > > On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 5:20 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz > > <bdelacre...@apache.org> wrote: > >> Hi, > >> On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 3:02 PM, Tommaso Teofili > >> <tommaso.teof...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >>> ...as per discussions on SLING-3223 [1] I'm opening the vote for > accepting the > >>> Sling replication module for inclusion in Apache Sling project... > >> > >> +1, conditional to doing an IP clearance as per > >> http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/ > >> > >> There's room for some improvements as discussed in SLING-3223, but I > >> think we should import the module once the IP clearance is done, and > >> work from that. > >> > >> BTW the digest of the patch is: > >> > >> SHA1(SLING-3223.patch.txt)= ee628f4556c71c19fa09ae4e58fc7b32182da11b > >> > >> -Bertrand >
