Makes sense. Thank you for the explanation. On Tuesday, July 18, 2017 at 3:28:17 PM UTC-4, Feng Xiao wrote: > > > > On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 7:04 AM, Brian Bustamante <bustama...@gmail.com > <javascript:>> wrote: > >> Hi Adam, >> >> Who would be the best person to talk about possibly adding support for a >> new language to the protobuf compiler? >> I have opened a mostly feature complete proto3 PR for F#: >> https://github.com/google/protobuf/pull/3378 >> > We can't accept a new language implementation into the protobuf repo > unless there is a Google engineer who can take on the maintenance work for > the new language, that invokes not only code changes and answering > questions, but also work like setting up automatic tests, making regular > releases and completing documentation. Right now these are tied to our > internal services/tools so an external contributor can't really help much > there. If there is a Google engineer who is willing to take on the work for > F#, I think we are happy to have him/her work with you on getting the F# > support into protobuf repo, but otherwise we don't really have the resource > to support a new language right now and the only option is to implement the > new language support in your own repo... > > Jisi is the tech lead of protobuf team and will be the ultimate decider on > this. I saw he already replied on your pull request. > > >> >> >> Thanks, >> Brian >> >> >> On Monday, July 17, 2017 at 3:14:01 PM UTC-4, Adam Cozzette wrote: >>> >>> I think for these small tweaks and fixes it doesn't matter much to us >>> whether there's an associated GitHub issue or not, so whichever way you >>> prefer is fine with me! >>> >>> On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 11:03 AM, Brad Larson <bkla...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Monday, July 17, 2017 at 12:20:22 PM UTC-5, Adam Cozzette wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Hi Brad, >>>>> >>>>> We don't have any real contribution guide but just accept pull >>>>> requests fairly informally. Probably the one really important guideline >>>>> is >>>>> that if you want to add a substantial new feature or make a major change, >>>>> it's best to talk to us (the protobuf team) first before spending much >>>>> time >>>>> implementing it. If it's a simple tweak or bugfix or whatever, though, >>>>> feel >>>>> free to just send off a pull request. We just tend to be somewhat >>>>> conservative about making major changes, because we have have to preserve >>>>> backward compatibility with a great deal of existing code, and we are >>>>> also >>>>> hesitant to add new features or options that will create extra >>>>> maintenance >>>>> work in the future. >>>>> >>>>> Your pull request looks great (thanks for sending that); I am just >>>>> waiting for the CI runs to finish but I'll merge it once they've run >>>>> successfully. >>>>> >>>>> Adam >>>>> >>>> >>>> Thanks Adam! Your guidelines above are very reasonable and I >>>> appreciate the response. I see my pull request has just been merged so >>>> I'll start cleaning up the other handful of minor fixes I have for our >>>> more >>>> strict build environment and push them up. >>>> >>>> One follow-up question - for small tweaks/fixes like these, which >>>> mostly are addressing compiler warnings, is an associated github issue >>>> helpful? Or does it just create more process on your end? Either way is >>>> fine with me! :) >>>> >>>> Thanks again, >>>> Brad >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Fri, Jul 14, 2017 at 10:14 AM, Brad Larson <bkla...@gmail.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Hi all! I'm curious if there is a contribution guide for protobuf, >>>>>> or anything I should be doing to help get my patch merged. It is very >>>>>> small and fixes a build error in our (warning-aggressive) environment at >>>>>> $DAYJOB. >>>>>> >>>>>> I've created an issue - >>>>>> https://github.com/google/protobuf/issues/3356 >>>>>> and a pull request - https://github.com/google/protobuf/pull/3357 >>>>>> >>>>>> Reading a bit more on other pull requests, I'm not sure if I should >>>>>> have added this to the master branch or the 3.3.x branch? I'm just >>>>>> hopeful >>>>>> to get this merged so we can run stock GPB in the future. I have a few >>>>>> other small tweaks like this as well, but want to get this one taken >>>>>> care >>>>>> of first. >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks! >>>>>> Brad >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> 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+u...@googlegroups.com. >>>>>> To post to this group, send email to prot...@googlegroups.com. >>>>>> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/protobuf. >>>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>> 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+u...@googlegroups.com. >>>> To post to this group, send email to prot...@googlegroups.com. >>>> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/protobuf. >>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>>> >>> >>> -- >> 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+u...@googlegroups.com <javascript:>. >> To post to this group, send email to prot...@googlegroups.com >> <javascript:>. >> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/protobuf. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >> > >
-- 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 protobuf@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/protobuf. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
