Mailing-List: contact mesos-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: mesos-dev@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of benjamin.hindman@gmail.com
 designates 209.85.214.175 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: benjamin.hindman@gmail.com
In-Reply-To: <C74D6367-13BC-4CD3-9EF5-EAEED60AFF9E@eecs.berkeley.edu>
References: <46A2506C-3465-49C6-AC41-0356F1E2B6C3@eecs.berkeley.edu>
	<CAFeOQnXJRiJ85bk=w5UOuH3RKy_m1zA61+Lqr=0eFTr=xnR2qA@mail.gmail.com>
	<56D6BA5B-AED7-4A97-B748-DD84BDC03139@eecs.berkeley.edu>
	<CALEZFQwpShBMoEbdADqzi+QL7=2_-icMCoT=P1zJWqFEVOyrrg@mail.gmail.com>
	<AFD38CB5-4B56-4AE4-B986-624A8F4D1BA4@eecs.berkeley.edu>
	<C74D6367-13BC-4CD3-9EF5-EAEED60AFF9E@eecs.berkeley.edu>
Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2012 19:53:28 -0700
Message-ID: 
 <CAFeOQnVF2Xsq28ia8ZyfG=+5rB9ffE9ms06rKWmye17eNoTAfw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: How hard would it be to upgrade the default protobuf version that
 Mesos depends on?
From: Benjamin Hindman <benh@eecs.berkeley.edu>
To: mesos-dev@incubator.apache.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=e89a8ff25632f81bbc04bc6cf15d

--e89a8ff25632f81bbc04bc6cf15d
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Yes please.


On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 7:52 PM, Matei Zaharia <matei@eecs.berkeley.edu>wrote:

> By the way, I just tried Ben's suggestions to use Protobuf 2.4.1 and it
> did mostly works (a few other things I had to change were references to
> protobuf 2.3.0 in src/python/setup.py.in, Hadoop, and the test framework
> launch scripts). Want me to post a patch for this?
>
> Matei
>
> On Mar 29, 2012, at 10:16 PM, Matei Zaharia wrote:
>
> > Smaller releases are definitely a good thing, but I brought this up
> because it's slightly tough to put in a minor release, since you'll change
> the version of a library that other people depend on. If there's no need to
> stick with protobuf 2.3 for some existing use, then maybe we should just go
> to 2.4.
> >
> > Matei
> >
> > On Mar 29, 2012, at 10:03 PM, Andy Konwinski wrote:
> >
> >> I would prefer to hold off and try to get a *much* smaller 2nd release
> out
> >> the door within a month or two after this one.
> >>
> >> Having a list of features to go into that one (including this feature)
> is a
> >> good thing. I'd go so far as to suggest we start the JIRA for the second
> >> release now, and even pick a target release date for it (end of May?)
> >>
> >> Andy
> >> On Mar 29, 2012 6:41 PM, "Matei Zaharia" <matei@eecs.berkeley.edu>
> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Okay, in that case, do you think it's worth doing it for the first
> >>> release, or should we leave it till later? I'm okay either way, but
> later
> >>> versions of Spark will need 2.4.1 because stuff like Akka is using it.
> I
> >>> agree we shouldn't delay the release for minor things though.
> >>>
> >>> Matei
> >>>
> >>> On Mar 29, 2012, at 9:37 PM, Benjamin Hindman wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Most likely this is very straightforward. Possibly as easy as
> replacing
> >>> the
> >>>> tar.gz in third_party and changing the third_party/versions.am to use
> >>>> "2.4.1" instead of "2.3.0".
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 6:31 PM, Matei Zaharia <
> matei@eecs.berkeley.edu
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> Just wondering, because 2.4.1 has been out for a while. I'm starting
> to
> >>>>> see other libraries depend on 2.4.1, which makes it tricky to link
> Mesos
> >>>>> into the same project.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Matei
> >>>
> >>>
> >
>
>

--e89a8ff25632f81bbc04bc6cf15d--