I can't answer the original question but can point out the protostuff ( https://github.com/protostuff/protostuff) folks have been responsive and friendly in the past when we (HBase) were curious about swapping in their stuff. Two significant benefits of protostuff, IMHO, is ASL 2 licensing and everything is implemented in Java including the compiler.
On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 8:49 AM, Sean Busbey <bus...@cloudera.com> wrote: > Anyone have a read on how the protobuf folks would feel about that? Apache > has a history of not accepting projects that are non-amicable forks. > > On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 9:24 AM, Allen Wittenauer <a...@altiscale.com> > wrote: > > > > > On Jun 12, 2015, at 1:03 PM, Alan Burlison <alan.burli...@oracle.com> > > wrote: > > > > > On 14/05/2015 18:41, Chris Nauroth wrote: > > > > > >> As a reminder though, the community probably would want to see a > strong > > >> justification for the upgrade in terms of features or performance or > > >> something else. Right now, I'm not seeing a significant benefit for > us > > >> based on my reading of their release notes. I think it's worthwhile > to > > >> figure this out first. Otherwise, there is a risk that any testing > work > > >> turns out to be a wasted effort. > > > > > > One reason at least: PB 2.5.0 has no support for Solaris SPARC. 2.6.1 > > does. > > > > > > That's a pretty good reason. > > > > Some of us had a discussion at Summit about effectively forking > > protobuf and making it an Apache TLP. This would give us a chance to get > > out from under Google's blind spot, guarantee better compatibility across > > the ecosystem, etc, etc. > > > > It is sounding more and more like that's really what needs to > > happen. > > > > > -- > Sean > -- Best regards, - Andy Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein (via Tom White)
