Re: Thrift versions and generated code

2015-11-12 Thread Josh Elser
Ahh, thanks, gentlemen. Andrew Purtell wrote: Yeah, let's finish that. On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 11:49 AM, Ted Yu wrote: See https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-14172 On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 11:46 AM, Josh Elser wrote: Hi, In looking at https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE

Re: Thrift versions and generated code

2015-11-12 Thread Andrew Purtell
Yeah, let's finish that. On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 11:49 AM, Ted Yu wrote: > See https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-14172 > > On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 11:46 AM, Josh Elser wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > In looking at https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-14800, I saw > > that the current

Re: Thrift versions and generated code

2015-11-12 Thread Ted Yu
See https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-14172 On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 11:46 AM, Josh Elser wrote: > Hi, > > In looking at https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-14800, I saw > that the current libthrift dependency on master was at 0.9.2, but the > generated code still has the 0.9.0

Thrift versions and generated code

2015-11-12 Thread Josh Elser
Hi, In looking at https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-14800, I saw that the current libthrift dependency on master was at 0.9.2, but the generated code still has the 0.9.0 comments. Is there a reason for that? Should the libthrift version defined in the poms be the de-facto version u