+1, I will open a issue to collect things we need to track about deprecating protobuf, before releasing V0.13.0
On 2025/08/06 16:13:48 Sem wrote: > Hello GAR Community! > > I want to raise a question about removing previously introduced > protobuf specs for the format. > > The initial idea was to allow multiple languages avoid manual defining > of the models for GAR YAML files and fully rely on the protobuf > messages via protobuf -> JSON -> YAML conversion (and back conversion). > > But IRL the whole idea failed. See comments in the related github > issue: > 1. > https://github.com/apache/incubator-graphar/issues/707#issuecomment-3139249373 > 2.https://github.com/apache/incubator-graphar/issues/707#issuecomment-313936596 > > At the moment there is no published parts of GAR that are using > protobuf messages, only unfinished JAVA API is relying on it. So, I see > it is as a nice moment to do this because it won't be user-facing > change and JAVA API can be updated quite easily. > > Instead of protobuf files I would like to update format specification > in documentation with detailed examples of YAML files, possible data > types and how they should look like in YAML. > > By this email I want to start an official discussion. If there won't be > any voice against it, I will open a [VOTE]. > > Best regards, > Sem > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
