Remove redundant field.

[martin-swift]

@silverjam Can you do the honors again for the autogen?

[martin-swift]

bumpity bump bump... @ljbade can you confirm that this is what you initially intended? @silverjam - if you don't have the bandwidth to auto-gen I can take a shot at dockerizing it; lemme know...

[silverjam]

@martin-swift updated

[martin-swift]

yow:

Non-required fields can be removed, as long as the field number is not used
again in your updated message type. You may want to rename the field 
instead, perhaps adding the prefix "OBSOLETE_", or make the field number
reserved, so that future users of your .proto can't accidentally reuse the number.

So if we rev a message that people are already using we can't delete a field unless we don't care about backwards compatibility?

[martin-swift]

thanks @silverjam ; anyone know what's up with the travis failures?

[silverjam]

Since this isn't really published or used externally yet I don't think it matters that we're deleting a field. The only risk here is if a consumer of these messages uses a version that's out of sync. Since we are in control of all these consumers the risk is low. External consumers of these messages are far enough away that this probably isn't very much of a risk.

[silverjam]

Travis failure is a hopefully transient download issue.