hbase-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Sean Busbey <bus...@apache.org>
Subject Re: HADOOP-13363
Date Mon, 11 Jul 2016 15:46:41 GMT
Don't we already shade it as a part of our shaded client artifact?

On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 10:38 AM, Andrew Purtell
<andrew.purtell@gmail.com> wrote:
> Even if they do - especially if they do - we should consider doing the same for our downstreamers.
>
>
>> On Jul 11, 2016, at 8:12 AM, Andrew Purtell <andrew.purtell@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> I would think so yes
>>
>>> On Jul 11, 2016, at 7:31 AM, Sean Busbey <busbey@cloudera.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> If Hadoop shades their protobuf that should keep any altering they do from
>>> impacting us, right?
>>>
>>> --
>>> Sean Busbey
>>>> On Jul 9, 2016 3:02 PM, "Andrew Purtell" <apurtell@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> PB3 sounds like a plan for 2.0 but what about all shipping versions.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On Sat, Jul 9, 2016 at 12:49 PM, Stack <stack@duboce.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> The plan in HBASE-15638 is to shade our protobuf so we are independent
of
>>>>> anyone else's protobuf and so we can move on to one of our choosing or
>>>> even
>>>>> check in our own protobuf if we have to (protobuf is lacking in support
>>>> for
>>>>> offheap). Anoop and Ram are thinking we should go to pb3. I'll let them
>>>>> talk of the testing they have done so far.
>>>>>
>>>>> St.Ack
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sat, Jul 9, 2016 at 10:44 AM, Andrew Purtell <apurtell@apache.org>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> We should look at HBASE-15638 again in light of HADOOP-13363.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>  - Andy
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet
>>>> Hein
>>>>>> (via Tom White)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Best regards,
>>>>
>>>>  - Andy
>>>>
>>>> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein
>>>> (via Tom White)
>>>>

Mime
View raw message