From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH 1/3] protobuf: minimal implementation for compact in-memory structures Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2011 09:48:11 -0700 Message-ID: <7vei2j18hg.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> References: <1308728011-14136-1-git-send-email-davidbarr@google.com> <1308728011-14136-2-git-send-email-davidbarr@google.com> <7voc1p64ap.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: GIT Mailing-list To: David Barr X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Jun 24 18:48:23 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Qa9YK-0000OX-VY for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Fri, 24 Jun 2011 18:48:21 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751413Ab1FXQsP (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Jun 2011 12:48:15 -0400 Received: from a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com ([64.74.157.62]:38487 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750773Ab1FXQsO (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Jun 2011 12:48:14 -0400 Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 13D5040B8; Fri, 24 Jun 2011 12:50:25 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=d4JciGFb/XCNXC58qwAa/FTTM54=; b=xJIXZb aWSpWg+iHQWs5trKVCgq9AnSUveSdflDDNuxywqyyqFzQpSL2UECUeiZ7De6GWW4 MuVTeOPCAAipAwg9H7RNuTq0OKBRyu6QUpkq9ilmWXgLEgk1wrDkrwhUc4N5Q5C2 cQbnM5apeitu07M6+tTru0Vmmu8nhxOTxV9Qw= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=NTMdYIhW2QBpLB2JSHupIjDDf7vllQM+ RgakmJgqnNL5VUHyKQ5AdPRWiK8l65Wa8qNnJ0CY2TPEH22/AdFOstig29kUSSvf hMCcKhBCa0qmmMzzDISNn65H1sjl3w4ZR9jcZCfrVDSJZ6ti3D5TNmbCkszy7T2H xryMQJgGo68= Received: from a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0AB8C40B7; Fri, 24 Jun 2011 12:50:25 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [76.102.170.102]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 62C4040B6; Fri, 24 Jun 2011 12:50:24 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: (David Barr's message of "Fri, 24 Jun 2011 09:04:11 -0700") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.2 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 0E4F629C-9E82-11E0-904D-5875C023C68D-77302942!a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: David Barr writes: >> How does this relate to http://code.google.com/p/protobuf/ which has a >> very similar name? If we do not intend to have any interoperability with >> it, we should avoid such a confusing name, I think. > > The relationship is that the design is shamelessly copied. ... and this will be API and bytestream compatible with that other protobuf? If not, please don't use that name. It confuses people, and if somebody wants to take libified part of our codebase into their application and link with the real protobuf, it will get even more confusing ;-). You can (and should) still state that the design was inspired by the other work in the comment at the beginning of the file or something. Thanks.