+1 for removal
________________________________
From: Mark Hanson <hans...@vmware.com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2021 11:44
To: dev@geode.apache.org <dev@geode.apache.org>
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] removal of experimental Protobuf client/server interface

+1 for removal.

On 3/23/21, 8:46 AM, "Darrel Schneider" <dar...@vmware.com> wrote:

    I'm in favor of its removal. I was working on improving the geode thread 
monitor and found doing that on the protobuf code was much more complicated.
    ________________________________
    From: Bruce Schuchardt <bru...@vmware.com>
    Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2021 8:16 AM
    To: dev@geode.apache.org <dev@geode.apache.org>
    Subject: [DISCUSS] removal of experimental Protobuf client/server interface

    Hi folks,

    We’ve had an experimental client/server interface in Geode that no-one to 
my knowledge is using.  We’re testing it with every build and are having to 
make changes to it to keep it up to date with the rest of the project.  The 
last change of substance to the geode-protobuf sub-project, for instance, was 
in 2018 but that’s been followed by many incidental commits.

    
GEM-8997<https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fissues.apache.org%2Fjira%2Fbrowse%2FGEODE-8997&amp;data=04%7C01%7Camurmann%40vmware.com%7Cdb5a8b73fdf14b1dce0c08d8ee2bc22d%7Cb39138ca3cee4b4aa4d6cd83d9dd62f0%7C0%7C0%7C637521219012361419%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&amp;sdata=rsn7U6WRKcH5Q%2FMUdRj5%2BO%2Fg%2B0vXtlQYql8eVLJAjnQ%3D&amp;reserved=0>
 was opened to have the sub-projects for this interface removed.  I’ve prepared 
a pull 
request<https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fapache%2Fgeode%2Fpull%2F6168&amp;data=04%7C01%7Camurmann%40vmware.com%7Cdb5a8b73fdf14b1dce0c08d8ee2bc22d%7Cb39138ca3cee4b4aa4d6cd83d9dd62f0%7C0%7C0%7C637521219012361419%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&amp;sdata=AqZymHsYnq804zdT4uL49c5173HtE%2FsmfohoPcf6UEg%3D&amp;reserved=0>
 to remove it and would like to get consensus to move forward with that effort.

Reply via email to