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

Update doc + questions #44

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Mar 3, 2019
Merged

Update doc + questions #44

merged 1 commit into from
Mar 3, 2019

Conversation

drseb
Copy link
Member

@drseb drseb commented Mar 1, 2019

questions @pnrobinson @julesjacobsen

why does it say libprotoc 3.6.1 when it said before that version 3.5 must be used?

why does it say, that fields can be "required" and then a few lines later it says it is not possible to define a field as required?

questions @pnrobinson @julesjacobsen 

why does it say libprotoc 3.6.1 when it said before that version 3.5 must be used?

why does it say, that fields can be "required" and then a few lines later it says it is not possible to define a field as required?
@pnrobinson
Copy link
Collaborator

@julesjacobsen Any idea when we can update the libprotoc version?

@pnrobinson
Copy link
Collaborator

@drseb version 3.5 and also 3.6.1 have a cosmetic bug (#39). I see now that there is a release candidate for version 3.7.1 (https://mvnrepository.com/artifact/com.google.protobuf/protobuf-java/3.7.0-rc1), and I hope that we will be able to use that for the first official release. In any case, the usage of 3.6.1 is for the command line example that is not needed to get to the Java code to run. I will add a comment about the versioning.

@pnrobinson pnrobinson merged commit 31f9b99 into phenopackets:master Mar 3, 2019
@julesjacobsen
Copy link
Collaborator

We need to wait for protobuf-java and protobuf-java-util 3.7.0 to be released to maven central - There is a ticket open about this protocolbuffers/protobuf#5812

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants