Thanks for contributing these patches and sorry for not being able to
respond to these patches timely.
The problem is that right now we have no one working on the open-source
protobuf project. You can see from the svn change history that very few
patches are applied to the repository since last release and all of them
are just trivial changes. We don't have time to work on an open-source
release until the team decide to prioritize it over other stuff we are
For issues in the bug tracker, we'll fix all "accepted" ones in the next
release. If the status remains "New", that means the issue needs more
consideration (not that we won't fix it in the next release, but just that
we haven't made a decision right now).
According to our yearly plan for 2014, we'll start to work on the next
open-source release in Q2. If you want a patch to be submitted sooner, you
can send it to https://codereview.appspot.com/ (e.g.,
https://codereview.appspot.com/63480043/). We'll discuss/review the code
there and help apply the patch after LGTM.
On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 4:09 AM, Daniel Martin <fiz...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Cross-posted from
> Hello, Google Protocol Buffers team!
> I see it's almost the time of year again for another protocol buffers
> release, more or less. I was wondering, before you do the release is there
> any chance you could look at my patches for these issues in the public bug
> tracker and tell me why they've apparently been silently rejected?
> https://code.google.com/p/protobuf/issues/detail?id=485 : ByteString
> should be Serializable
> https://code.google.com/p/protobuf/issues/detail?id=501 : Repetitive code
> adding to extension registry trips over java compiler's method limits
> https://code.google.com/p/protobuf/issues/detail?id=579 : An excessive
> number of messages in a single file can also generate uncompilably large
> (Those last two bugs have a combined patch in a comment to bug 501)
> From my perspective I've gotten no feedback at all since filing the
> bugs/patches, except that the first bug was marked "accepted", though I can
> also look in the subversion repo and see that these patches haven't been
> applied. I'd like to know if these bugs are going to be addressed at all,
> and whether there's something inadequate about my patches.
> I realize that neither I nor my employer give Google a single cent for
> this, but it would be nice to have some way to distinguish the effect of
> filing a bug (with patch) to the bug tracker from the effect of printing
> out my patch and dropping it in the shredder.
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Protocol Buffers" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to protobuf+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to firstname.lastname@example.org.
> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/protobuf.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Protocol Buffers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
To post to this group, send email to email@example.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/protobuf.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.