[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-16308?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15537150#comment-15537150
]
stack commented on HBASE-16308:
-------------------------------
Just to say that I have now gone back some from this idea of moving all to do
with protobuf back into one module.
Rather, protobufs should be packaged with the module that uses them in the case
of coprocessor endpoints or say for REST. This issue made sense at one time
when trying to sort out our protobuf mess but now we have a clue and a
separation between 'internal' protobuf use and external -- e.g. CPEP -- we can
get back to good module encapsulation. I'll write up 'rules' in a new protobuf
chapter in book.
> Contain protobuf references
> ---------------------------
>
> Key: HBASE-16308
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-16308
> Project: HBase
> Issue Type: Sub-task
> Components: Protobufs
> Reporter: stack
> Assignee: stack
> Fix For: 2.0.0
>
> Attachments: HBASE-16308.master.001.patch,
> HBASE-16308.master.002.patch, HBASE-16308.master.003.patch,
> HBASE-16308.master.004.patch, HBASE-16308.master.005.patch,
> HBASE-16308.master.006.patch, HBASE-16308.master.006.patch,
> HBASE-16308.master.007.patch, HBASE-16308.master.008.patch,
> HBASE-16308.master.009.patch, HBASE-16308.master.010.patch,
> HBASE-16308.master.011.patch, HBASE-16308.master.012.patch,
> HBASE-16308.master.013.patch, HBASE-16308.master.014.patch,
> HBASE-16308.master.015.patch, HBASE-16308.master.015.patch
>
>
> Clean up our protobuf references so contained to just a few classes rather
> than being spread about the codebase. Doing this work will make it easier
> landing the parent issue and will make it more clear where the division
> between shaded protobuf and unshaded protobuf lies (we need to continue with
> unshaded protobuf for HDFS references by AsyncWAL and probably EndPoint
> Coprocessors)
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
