Skip to content

proto(sql): nested Column.fields + adopt buf 1.71.0 formatter#2518

Merged
c-julin merged 2 commits into
masterfrom
jc/sql-column-fields
Jun 19, 2026
Merged

proto(sql): nested Column.fields + adopt buf 1.71.0 formatter#2518
c-julin merged 2 commits into
masterfrom
jc/sql-column-fields

Conversation

@c-julin

@c-julin c-julin commented Jun 19, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

What

  1. Adds repeated Column fields = 3 to the v1alpha3 SQL Column message so composite/struct (json) columns can carry their nested column structure (parsed from the engine's structural type). Empty for scalar columns.
  2. Bumps the pinned BUF_VERSION to 1.71.0 and reformats the proto tree to match.

Why the buf bump is bundled here

CI's buf-action is unpinned and floats to the latest buf — now 1.71.0 (released 2026-06-16), whose reformatter collapses single-ref nested option blocks (schema: { json_schema: {...} }) onto one line. The Taskfile was pinned at buf 1.65.0, which still expands them. As a result the validate (buf-action) and Proto generate (Taskfile) checks demanded opposite formatting, and no proto-touching PR could pass both. This PR was the first to surface it.

Fix: bump BUF_VERSION in taskfiles/proto.yaml to 1.71.0 and reformat the tree so local generation matches CI. buf-action is intentionally left unpinned so it keeps tracking the latest buf.

Changes

  • proto/.../v1alpha3/sql.proto: new Column.fields
  • 38 proto files: buf 1.71.0 reformat (whitespace/block-collapsing only, no semantic change)
  • taskfiles/proto.yaml: BUF_VERSION 1.65.0 -> 1.71.0
  • Regenerated Go / TS / OpenAPI artifacts

Verification

  • buf 1.71.0 format --exit-code and buf lint pass
  • task proto:generate produces no diff (generated artifacts match)
  • go build of the protogen package passes
  • Column.fields is additive (field number 3), backwards-compatible

No ticket reference.

Add a repeated Column fields = 3 to the v1alpha3 SQL Column message so
composite/struct (json) columns can carry their nested column structure
parsed from the engine's structural type. Empty for scalar columns.

Regenerates Go, TypeScript, and OpenAPI artifacts.
@github-actions

github-actions Bot commented Jun 19, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

The latest Buf updates on your PR. Results from workflow Buf CI / validate (pull_request).

BuildFormatLintBreakingUpdated (UTC)
✅ passed✅ passed✅ passed✅ passedJun 19, 2026, 8:29 AM

CI's buf-action floats to the latest buf (now 1.71.0, released 2026-06-16),
whose reformatter collapses single-ref nested option blocks onto one line.
The Taskfile's pinned buf (1.65.0) still expanded them, so the validate and
proto-generate CI checks demanded opposite formatting and no proto-touching
PR could go green.

Bump the pinned BUF_VERSION to 1.71.0 and reformat the proto tree so local
generation matches CI. buf-action stays unpinned to keep tracking latest.
@c-julin c-julin changed the title proto(sql): add nested Column.fields to v1alpha3 SQL Column proto(sql): nested Column.fields + adopt buf 1.71.0 formatter Jun 19, 2026
@c-julin c-julin merged commit 44fc8fe into master Jun 19, 2026
23 checks passed
@c-julin c-julin deleted the jc/sql-column-fields branch June 19, 2026 09:43
andrewhsu added a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 23, 2026
PR #2512 pinned the buf CLI in .github/workflows/buf.yml to 1.65.0, but
#2518 had already bumped codegen (BUF_VERSION in taskfiles/proto.yaml) to
1.71.0 and reformatted every proto with the 1.71.0 formatter. CI then
validated 1.71.0-formatted protos with buf 1.65.0, which re-expands the
nested message literals that 1.71.0 collapses, so buf format --diff failed
on master across ~30 protos.

Bump all three buf-action version pins to 1.71.0 so the CI format check
matches the committed protos and the codegen source of truth.

Verified locally against current master protos:
- buf 1.65.0 format --diff --exit-code: exit 100 (reproduces the failure)
- buf 1.71.0 format --diff --exit-code: clean

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
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.

2 participants