-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 29
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
Add Group API #99
Add Group API #99
Conversation
Signed-off-by: Jörn Friedrich Dreyer <jfd@butonic.de>
@labkode @ishank011 as I cannot push to |
option java_multiple_files = true; | ||
option java_outer_classname = "ResourcesProto"; | ||
option java_package = "com.cs3.identity.group.v1beta1"; | ||
option objc_class_prefix = "CIU"; |
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.
This needs to be CIG. That's why the build fails
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.
aaaaah, I was wondering, thank you!
This reverts commit b8461ff.
@refs @butonic we have cyclic imports (user/resources and group/resources) due to which the build failed https://cloud.drone.io/cs3org/go-cs3apis/115/1/2 |
@refs pushing a fix. There's a duplicate method in both the APIs ( |
it should work, but having a go build step for the proto files before it gets to go-cs3api might be a good idea. Not sure if there is a linter for protobuf to catch errors like this, since it is a language specific error, I don't see this happening in JavaScript |
Makes a lot of sense. I think it should be pretty simple to add. We'll just need to execute the language-specific actions without pushing to the corresponding repos. I'll create an issue so I don't forget. |
Signed-off-by: Jörn Friedrich Dreyer jfd@butonic.de
I did not care to preserve backwards compatability and reused old ids, which is why there are build failures for protobuf.
Let me know if we can go forward with this or if the API is considered staple and we need to keep backwards compatabililty.