Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Bumping proto-google-common-protos to 1.0.0 #3765

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Nov 17, 2017

Conversation

garrettjonesgoogle
Copy link
Contributor

We recently released proto-google-common-protos to 1.0.0.

@thelinuxfoundation
Copy link

Thank you for your pull request. Before we can look at your contribution, we need to ensure all contributors are covered by a Contributor License Agreement.

After the following items are addressed, please respond with a new comment here, and the automated system will re-verify.

Regards,
The Linux Foundation CLA GitHub bot

@garrettjonesgoogle
Copy link
Contributor Author

Reverify me, linuxfoundation!

@ejona86 ejona86 added the kokoro:run Add this label to a PR to tell Kokoro the code is safe and tests can be run label Nov 17, 2017
@kokoro-team kokoro-team removed the kokoro:run Add this label to a PR to tell Kokoro the code is safe and tests can be run label Nov 17, 2017
@ejona86 ejona86 added the kokoro:run Add this label to a PR to tell Kokoro the code is safe and tests can be run label Nov 17, 2017
@kokoro-team kokoro-team removed the kokoro:run Add this label to a PR to tell Kokoro the code is safe and tests can be run label Nov 17, 2017
@ejona86 ejona86 merged commit 69aedda into grpc:master Nov 17, 2017
@ejona86
Copy link
Member

ejona86 commented Nov 17, 2017

@garrettjonesgoogle, would this be good to backport to the 1.8 release next week?

@garrettjonesgoogle
Copy link
Contributor Author

It's really just about guarantee of surface stability - there might be some extra protos in there but I'm not sure. I think it really depends if you want to "hand over" this surface stability to users of 1.8; there is very little risk to backporting it.

@ejona86
Copy link
Member

ejona86 commented Nov 17, 2017

Okay. We didn't stabilize the API that uses it in 1.8, and we'd still need to figure out Java 6 vs Java 7 bytecode before we could. So I won't bother backporting, since it's not really a bug and there's no need.

@carl-mastrangelo carl-mastrangelo added this to the 1.9 milestone Nov 30, 2017
@lock lock bot locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Jan 19, 2019
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants