+1 for removal.
On 3/23/21, 8:46 AM, "Darrel Schneider" <[email protected]> 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 <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2021 8:16 AM
To: [email protected] <[email protected]>
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&data=04%7C01%7Chansonm%40vmware.com%7C2f2e8aeeaafb4e4936a008d8ee12d998%7Cb39138ca3cee4b4aa4d6cd83d9dd62f0%7C0%7C0%7C637521112023631355%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=McllyPUqh%2B3SUjluBghccLRe%2FKCaPGNG2s7btB8wMvY%3D&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&data=04%7C01%7Chansonm%40vmware.com%7C2f2e8aeeaafb4e4936a008d8ee12d998%7Cb39138ca3cee4b4aa4d6cd83d9dd62f0%7C0%7C0%7C637521112023631355%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=kXVo5uhJV4w81VD84jv8DI1iki9hha4LbBGL1HRGE2A%3D&reserved=0>
to remove it and would like to get consensus to move forward with that effort.
