Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-hbase-dev-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-hbase-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 546AC10AF4 for ; Tue, 28 Jan 2014 17:13:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 74910 invoked by uid 500); 28 Jan 2014 17:13:15 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-hbase-dev-archive@hbase.apache.org Received: (qmail 74834 invoked by uid 500); 28 Jan 2014 17:13:14 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@hbase.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@hbase.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@hbase.apache.org Received: (qmail 74697 invoked by uid 99); 28 Jan 2014 17:13:14 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 28 Jan 2014 17:13:14 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.5 required=5.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of nkeywal@gmail.com designates 74.125.82.50 as permitted sender) Received: from [74.125.82.50] (HELO mail-wg0-f50.google.com) (74.125.82.50) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 28 Jan 2014 17:13:08 +0000 Received: by mail-wg0-f50.google.com with SMTP id l18so1369657wgh.5 for ; Tue, 28 Jan 2014 09:12:48 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=jAPZk2ZRzBUCmmopkILxFzyMuvPxtIoqAS8WBKpKKG4=; b=sN2Guc2EA0fzZkDU3nkX43PuWEwKNKrQxKvaOt51B/wyyo+o/EmltNROUNzrZ+RVJP Qij0RM2l+vj3zYfe7YR86aG1I9TKPzxmLI1jPDnG8eSU3vfMQFY7IgQdLQ+Zy5u2mOQO 2ey62L0iJb5MMAck7bgx/tgYsB/HP0NBG8bMHXFdcJgIB6owDt3ziwaOmfkTw6t3pLrX nWkegevr8LDIQOcU7jZPJI4ybVtrLRzLOxyKib9b5O4TUp5euQLMMUwb/jkXJC0H8CN6 50BkRfZdWNOFZoPwttZZ+DehSC02sUXjt26kPtgSduk0KqFzc5rZJZRu8ESq60033Zyy x85w== X-Received: by 10.194.175.66 with SMTP id by2mr561433wjc.59.1390929167892; Tue, 28 Jan 2014 09:12:47 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.194.86.70 with HTTP; Tue, 28 Jan 2014 09:12:27 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <2ccc7ed6-6477-4897-88d8-7808d78ebc6e@googlegroups.com> From: Nicolas Liochon Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2014 18:12:27 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: 1.5.0-SNAPSHOT conflicting with hbase-proto 0.96.x To: tsuna Cc: helllamer , AsyncHBase , hbase-dev Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e013d19f8f5c72f04f10aeedc X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org --089e013d19f8f5c72f04f10aeedc Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Hum.... the API is different today, and will remain different after HBASE-10422. https://github.com/apache/hbase/blob/trunk/hbase-protocol/src/main/java/com/google/protobuf/ZeroCopyLiteralByteString.java has: public static ByteString wrap(final byte[] array, int offset, int length) { And this method is not in https://github.com/tsuna/asynchbase/blob/master/src/protobuf/ZeroCopyLiteralByteString.java It's too brittle. I created HBASE-10431 for this. On Mon, Jan 27, 2014 at 5:35 PM, tsuna wrote: > On Mon, Jan 27, 2014 at 1:02 AM, Nicolas Liochon > wrote: > > Should we not rename ZeroCopyLiteralByteString to something like > > HBasePrivateZeroCopyLiteralByteString to be sure that we won't have name > > conflicts in the future? > > I don't mind keeping the same name as long as we agree on the API. > I don't expect this class to change much if at all anyway. It's just > really unfortunate that this method was changed, what's more with a > signature that renders it unusable. > > -- > Benoit "tsuna" Sigoure > --089e013d19f8f5c72f04f10aeedc--