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

support protobuf build by default #264

Merged
merged 7 commits into from
Jul 19, 2019
Merged

Conversation

BusyJay
Copy link
Member

@BusyJay BusyJay commented Jul 18, 2019

And support prost optionally

This is a derive work of #262 and #260.

And support prost optionally
@BusyJay BusyJay requested review from nrc, breezewish and hicqu July 18, 2019 11:23
@BusyJay BusyJay mentioned this pull request Jul 18, 2019
2 tasks
Hoverbear
Hoverbear previously approved these changes Jul 18, 2019
Copy link
Contributor

@Hoverbear Hoverbear left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This makes us fall against #223 again, but I think it's not a blocker. LGTM

@Hoverbear
Copy link
Contributor

@BusyJay Seems there are some clippy errors. :(

@nrc
Copy link
Contributor

nrc commented Jul 18, 2019

Could you summarize how this different from #262 and #260 please? Why does this block #263 rather than #263 blocking this?

@BusyJay
Copy link
Member Author

BusyJay commented Jul 19, 2019

This PR uses protobuf-build to generate codes just as #262 does, but the generated codes are put inside target directory instead which is the same as #260.

@BusyJay
Copy link
Member Author

BusyJay commented Jul 19, 2019

Because CI in #260 is broken due to the changes to grpcio-compiler is out of sync to protobuf-build. This PR updates protobuf-build to a compatible version.

@hicqu
Copy link
Contributor

hicqu commented Jul 19, 2019

@BusyJay are you fixing the CI?

@BusyJay
Copy link
Member Author

BusyJay commented Jul 19, 2019

Yes.

hicqu
hicqu previously approved these changes Jul 19, 2019
- cargo test --all -- --nocapture
# There is a bug in protobuf-build that cached size is not supported yet.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Is the bug still here?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yes. It can be fixed later. Making rust-protobuf back is with highest priority.

@BusyJay BusyJay merged commit 92fb310 into tikv:master Jul 19, 2019
@BusyJay BusyJay deleted the update-protobuf-build branch July 19, 2019 11:45
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.

6 participants