-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 144
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
Support generating .pb.go files from protobufs without service definitions #246
Support generating .pb.go files from protobufs without service definitions #246
Conversation
truss/config.go
Outdated
@@ -18,4 +18,7 @@ type Config struct { | |||
DefPaths []string | |||
// The files of a previously generated service, may be nil | |||
PrevGen map[string]io.Reader | |||
|
|||
// The flag that specifies if a service should be built. | |||
NoService bool |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
If it would be preferable for parseInput
to return an additional value (NoService
) rather than extending the Config
struct I can rework that.
Hey @eriktate, I'm going to review this in the next few hours. I'm sorry for causing a conflict. I'll PR a fix on top of your PR, to resolve the conflict. We just wanted the 1.9 fix in very strongly. Though your PR came up first, so it is only polite for me to resolve this conflict I created. Thanks for the PR! I look forward to taking a closer look very shortly. |
Updated code path based on changes from master
Hey @eriktate, here is that PR I mentioned: eriktate#3 Changes look good! Sorry that some of the same logic was reworked right after you put this PR up. Hope to talk with you soon. |
Updates from master
@adamryman No worries! Just merged your PR resolving the conflicts, so this should be good to go! |
Just because I make some extra changes in the PR on your PR, I would like one other team member to take a look. @zaquestion, @lelandbatey, if either of you could give a ✅ then I think we will be ready to merge. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yay for the fix toward #242!
Effectively just making sure protoc is still run against .proto files that define shared messages and no RPC service.
This PR addresses #242