Update the proto, go, and c++ packages #302
Conversation
|
/gcbrun |
|
Not sure I am super excited about the C++ namespace Maybe we are better off adding a suffix to all the top-level messages/enums, such as |
|
cel::expr is the 'expression' part of the C(E)L. There should also be a parser and an evaluator for the full language, for example. |
|
A rename of the messages would be a much larger transition for the open source libraries that have already adopted these protos. |
|
(also, pretty sure you need at least one sub package in go and maybe python) |
|
|
||
| syntax = "proto3"; | ||
|
|
||
| package cel.expr; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why are we not including the tld in the main proto package name?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The real requirement is: The proto package should match both the c++ namespace and the folders.
This is the (defacto?) standard way to reconcile that c++, python, es, etc, do not typically include the tld in namespaces/packages. It is only go (which uses it as real dns address) and java (which shoves the rdomain in the namespace per the style guide) that use the tld.
It matches the googleapis repo, for example see:
https://github.com/googleapis/googleapis/blob/master/google/api/log.proto#L24
|
/gcbrun |
1 similar comment
|
/gcbrun |
|
@Alfus can you sync with HEAD and push again? I've updated the config for GCB, but I don't think it'll take in this PR until its synced. |
|
I could also delete some of the old definitions. It seems to just be a lot to compute |
|
/gcbrun |
To match the following:
The tld is typically not included in proto/c++, and was in the wrong spot for the go package.
This leaves the existing protos inplace, to allow for a transition to the new packages.