Why do we generate python and ruby thrift code?

[John Vines <vi...@apache.org>]

I was just checking out our thrift generation script and I noticed it also
does python and ruby for some reason, even though we don't use or support
those interfaces. I wanted to check their validity before I ticketed and
purge that action to make sure I wasn't missing something.

Re: Why do we generate python and ruby thrift code?

[Christopher <ct...@apache.org>]

You could include the C++ generation in that list as well. It doesn't
matter much, though, so long as the work stays in the target/ directory.

The easiest thing to do is simply move the thrift generation to a Maven
profile, so none of it gets run unless we explicitly want to anyway (wasted
cycles most of the time). When we enable the profile, we may want to
generate the other languages, so they can be used by other pieces (we only
use the Java code now), but those lines can be commented out for now.



--
Christopher L Tubbs II
http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii


On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 3:10 PM, Eric Newton <er...@gmail.com> wrote:

> It doesn't make much sense to generate these except for the Proxy API.
>
> -Eric
>
>
> On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 2:54 PM, John Vines <vi...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > I was just checking out our thrift generation script and I noticed it
> also
> > does python and ruby for some reason, even though we don't use or support
> > those interfaces. I wanted to check their validity before I ticketed and
> > purge that action to make sure I wasn't missing something.
> >
>

Re: Why do we generate python and ruby thrift code?

[Eric Newton <er...@gmail.com>]

It doesn't make much sense to generate these except for the Proxy API.

-Eric


On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 2:54 PM, John Vines <vi...@apache.org> wrote:

> I was just checking out our thrift generation script and I noticed it also
> does python and ruby for some reason, even though we don't use or support
> those interfaces. I wanted to check their validity before I ticketed and
> purge that action to make sure I wasn't missing something.
>