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

Add buf.build #59

Closed
wants to merge 5 commits into from
Closed

Add buf.build #59

wants to merge 5 commits into from

Conversation

tac0turtle
Copy link
Member

@tac0turtle tac0turtle commented Dec 2, 2021

But provides a layout to the repo that is common amongst Protobuf repos. This helps with registering proto types in the proto registry.

In ibc, proofs.proto is imported via confio/proofs.proto, which fails in grace reflection as its not correct in the proto registry

closes #32

@@ -1,16 +1,18 @@
syntax = "proto3";

package ics23;
package confio.v1.ics23;
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

this will need to be regenerated, want to double check if its okay before doing so.

DO NOT MERGE

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Sure, we can rename this.
Let's make sure this gets into a 0.7.0 release as it is breaking for the client.
I assume the wire format doesn't change, which we do try to avoid.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

correct wire format does not change. Would you be up for cutting 1.0?

Copy link
Contributor

@ethanfrey ethanfrey left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks like a nice cleanup.
Curious why the CI doesn't run

@@ -1,16 +1,18 @@
syntax = "proto3";

package ics23;
package confio.v1.ics23;
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Sure, we can rename this.
Let's make sure this gets into a 0.7.0 release as it is breaking for the client.
I assume the wire format doesn't change, which we do try to avoid.

@tac0turtle
Copy link
Member Author

this is ready for go. For js, its unclear to me what I need to run? Rust, is panicking

@ethanfrey
Copy link
Contributor

this is ready for go. For js, its unclear to me what I need to run? Rust, is panicking

Ooh, sounds like fun. I will come back to this when I have a bit of time.

@tac0turtle tac0turtle closed this Nov 30, 2022
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.

Add go package option to proofs.proto
2 participants