On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 9:38 AM, Jacob Rief <jacob.r...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hello Ernest,
> this code is part of a private project in progress and it works well
> in that context. Unfortunately the Google guys had no use case for it,
> therefore they did not want to incorporate it into their code base;
> maybe they just suffer the not-invented-here-syndrome.

Nonsense.  Your code is obviously useful and I thank you for writing it.
 The thing is, if we were to take every single piece of useful utility code
that people write on top of protobufs and add them to the core distribution,
it would be huge and bloated and people would desert it for a lighter
library.  In fact, I think the protobuf implementation is too bloated
already.  I'm actually planning to divide the protobuf project into three
separate projects (for C++, Java, and Python) and would like to find other
wise to cut out the fat.

> When my project
> is ready to be published, I will add that code there. If I can get
> write access to a PB-related Google-repository, I will use that. The
> reason I did not publish anything yet, was, that I did not want to
> start a Google project just to publish two files.

There's nothing wrong with creating a project to publish two files.  I have
done it before.

That said, I can see a case for setting up a "protobuf utils" project to
contain a bunch of little independent modules like this and may do so myself
in the future -- if I get time.  If someone else wants to set up such a
project, be my guest.  I will be happy to post many prominent links to it.

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Protocol Buffers" group.
To post to this group, send email to proto...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
For more options, visit this group at 

Reply via email to