Consul is a distributed, highly available, and data center aware solution to connect and configure applications across dynamic, distributed infrastructure.
You can not select more than 25 topics Topics must start with a letter or number, can include dashes ('-') and can be up to 35 characters long.

516 lines
18 KiB

// Copyright (c) HashiCorp, Inc.
// SPDX-License-Identifier: MPL-2.0
// Code generated by protoc-gen-go. DO NOT EDIT.
// versions:
// protoc-gen-go v1.33.0
// protoc (unknown)
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
// source: pbacl/acl.proto
package pbacl
import (
2 years ago
_ "github.com/hashicorp/consul/proto-public/annotations/ratelimit"
protoreflect "google.golang.org/protobuf/reflect/protoreflect"
protoimpl "google.golang.org/protobuf/runtime/protoimpl"
reflect "reflect"
sync "sync"
)
const (
// Verify that this generated code is sufficiently up-to-date.
_ = protoimpl.EnforceVersion(20 - protoimpl.MinVersion)
// Verify that runtime/protoimpl is sufficiently up-to-date.
_ = protoimpl.EnforceVersion(protoimpl.MaxVersion - 20)
)
type LogoutResponse struct {
state protoimpl.MessageState
sizeCache protoimpl.SizeCache
unknownFields protoimpl.UnknownFields
}
func (x *LogoutResponse) Reset() {
*x = LogoutResponse{}
if protoimpl.UnsafeEnabled {
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
mi := &file_pbacl_acl_proto_msgTypes[0]
ms := protoimpl.X.MessageStateOf(protoimpl.Pointer(x))
ms.StoreMessageInfo(mi)
}
}
func (x *LogoutResponse) String() string {
return protoimpl.X.MessageStringOf(x)
}
func (*LogoutResponse) ProtoMessage() {}
func (x *LogoutResponse) ProtoReflect() protoreflect.Message {
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
mi := &file_pbacl_acl_proto_msgTypes[0]
if protoimpl.UnsafeEnabled && x != nil {
ms := protoimpl.X.MessageStateOf(protoimpl.Pointer(x))
if ms.LoadMessageInfo() == nil {
ms.StoreMessageInfo(mi)
}
return ms
}
return mi.MessageOf(x)
}
// Deprecated: Use LogoutResponse.ProtoReflect.Descriptor instead.
func (*LogoutResponse) Descriptor() ([]byte, []int) {
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
return file_pbacl_acl_proto_rawDescGZIP(), []int{0}
}
type LoginRequest struct {
state protoimpl.MessageState
sizeCache protoimpl.SizeCache
unknownFields protoimpl.UnknownFields
// auth_method is the name of the configured auth method that will be used to
// validate the presented bearer token.
AuthMethod string `protobuf:"bytes,1,opt,name=auth_method,json=authMethod,proto3" json:"auth_method,omitempty"`
// bearer_token is a token produced by a trusted identity provider as
// configured by the auth method.
BearerToken string `protobuf:"bytes,2,opt,name=bearer_token,json=bearerToken,proto3" json:"bearer_token,omitempty"`
// meta is a collection of arbitrary key-value pairs associated to the token,
// it is useful for tracking the origin of tokens.
Meta map[string]string `protobuf:"bytes,3,rep,name=meta,proto3" json:"meta,omitempty" protobuf_key:"bytes,1,opt,name=key,proto3" protobuf_val:"bytes,2,opt,name=value,proto3"`
// namespace (enterprise only) is the namespace in which the auth method
// resides.
Namespace string `protobuf:"bytes,4,opt,name=namespace,proto3" json:"namespace,omitempty"`
// partition (enterprise only) is the partition in which the auth method
// resides.
Partition string `protobuf:"bytes,5,opt,name=partition,proto3" json:"partition,omitempty"`
// datacenter is the target datacenter in which the request will be processed.
Datacenter string `protobuf:"bytes,6,opt,name=datacenter,proto3" json:"datacenter,omitempty"`
}
func (x *LoginRequest) Reset() {
*x = LoginRequest{}
if protoimpl.UnsafeEnabled {
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
mi := &file_pbacl_acl_proto_msgTypes[1]
ms := protoimpl.X.MessageStateOf(protoimpl.Pointer(x))
ms.StoreMessageInfo(mi)
}
}
func (x *LoginRequest) String() string {
return protoimpl.X.MessageStringOf(x)
}
func (*LoginRequest) ProtoMessage() {}
func (x *LoginRequest) ProtoReflect() protoreflect.Message {
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
mi := &file_pbacl_acl_proto_msgTypes[1]
if protoimpl.UnsafeEnabled && x != nil {
ms := protoimpl.X.MessageStateOf(protoimpl.Pointer(x))
if ms.LoadMessageInfo() == nil {
ms.StoreMessageInfo(mi)
}
return ms
}
return mi.MessageOf(x)
}
// Deprecated: Use LoginRequest.ProtoReflect.Descriptor instead.
func (*LoginRequest) Descriptor() ([]byte, []int) {
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
return file_pbacl_acl_proto_rawDescGZIP(), []int{1}
}
func (x *LoginRequest) GetAuthMethod() string {
if x != nil {
return x.AuthMethod
}
return ""
}
func (x *LoginRequest) GetBearerToken() string {
if x != nil {
return x.BearerToken
}
return ""
}
func (x *LoginRequest) GetMeta() map[string]string {
if x != nil {
return x.Meta
}
return nil
}
func (x *LoginRequest) GetNamespace() string {
if x != nil {
return x.Namespace
}
return ""
}
func (x *LoginRequest) GetPartition() string {
if x != nil {
return x.Partition
}
return ""
}
func (x *LoginRequest) GetDatacenter() string {
if x != nil {
return x.Datacenter
}
return ""
}
type LoginResponse struct {
state protoimpl.MessageState
sizeCache protoimpl.SizeCache
unknownFields protoimpl.UnknownFields
// token is the generated ACL token.
Token *LoginToken `protobuf:"bytes,1,opt,name=token,proto3" json:"token,omitempty"`
}
func (x *LoginResponse) Reset() {
*x = LoginResponse{}
if protoimpl.UnsafeEnabled {
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
mi := &file_pbacl_acl_proto_msgTypes[2]
ms := protoimpl.X.MessageStateOf(protoimpl.Pointer(x))
ms.StoreMessageInfo(mi)
}
}
func (x *LoginResponse) String() string {
return protoimpl.X.MessageStringOf(x)
}
func (*LoginResponse) ProtoMessage() {}
func (x *LoginResponse) ProtoReflect() protoreflect.Message {
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
mi := &file_pbacl_acl_proto_msgTypes[2]
if protoimpl.UnsafeEnabled && x != nil {
ms := protoimpl.X.MessageStateOf(protoimpl.Pointer(x))
if ms.LoadMessageInfo() == nil {
ms.StoreMessageInfo(mi)
}
return ms
}
return mi.MessageOf(x)
}
// Deprecated: Use LoginResponse.ProtoReflect.Descriptor instead.
func (*LoginResponse) Descriptor() ([]byte, []int) {
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
return file_pbacl_acl_proto_rawDescGZIP(), []int{2}
}
func (x *LoginResponse) GetToken() *LoginToken {
if x != nil {
return x.Token
}
return nil
}
type LoginToken struct {
state protoimpl.MessageState
sizeCache protoimpl.SizeCache
unknownFields protoimpl.UnknownFields
// accessor_id is a UUID used to identify the ACL token.
AccessorId string `protobuf:"bytes,1,opt,name=accessor_id,json=accessorId,proto3" json:"accessor_id,omitempty"`
// secret_id is a UUID presented as a credential by clients.
SecretId string `protobuf:"bytes,2,opt,name=secret_id,json=secretId,proto3" json:"secret_id,omitempty"`
}
func (x *LoginToken) Reset() {
*x = LoginToken{}
if protoimpl.UnsafeEnabled {
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
mi := &file_pbacl_acl_proto_msgTypes[3]
ms := protoimpl.X.MessageStateOf(protoimpl.Pointer(x))
ms.StoreMessageInfo(mi)
}
}
func (x *LoginToken) String() string {
return protoimpl.X.MessageStringOf(x)
}
func (*LoginToken) ProtoMessage() {}
func (x *LoginToken) ProtoReflect() protoreflect.Message {
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
mi := &file_pbacl_acl_proto_msgTypes[3]
if protoimpl.UnsafeEnabled && x != nil {
ms := protoimpl.X.MessageStateOf(protoimpl.Pointer(x))
if ms.LoadMessageInfo() == nil {
ms.StoreMessageInfo(mi)
}
return ms
}
return mi.MessageOf(x)
}
// Deprecated: Use LoginToken.ProtoReflect.Descriptor instead.
func (*LoginToken) Descriptor() ([]byte, []int) {
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
return file_pbacl_acl_proto_rawDescGZIP(), []int{3}
}
func (x *LoginToken) GetAccessorId() string {
if x != nil {
return x.AccessorId
}
return ""
}
func (x *LoginToken) GetSecretId() string {
if x != nil {
return x.SecretId
}
return ""
}
type LogoutRequest struct {
state protoimpl.MessageState
sizeCache protoimpl.SizeCache
unknownFields protoimpl.UnknownFields
// token is the ACL token's secret ID.
Token string `protobuf:"bytes,1,opt,name=token,proto3" json:"token,omitempty"`
// datacenter is the target datacenter in which the request will be processed.
Datacenter string `protobuf:"bytes,2,opt,name=datacenter,proto3" json:"datacenter,omitempty"`
}
func (x *LogoutRequest) Reset() {
*x = LogoutRequest{}
if protoimpl.UnsafeEnabled {
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
mi := &file_pbacl_acl_proto_msgTypes[4]
ms := protoimpl.X.MessageStateOf(protoimpl.Pointer(x))
ms.StoreMessageInfo(mi)
}
}
func (x *LogoutRequest) String() string {
return protoimpl.X.MessageStringOf(x)
}
func (*LogoutRequest) ProtoMessage() {}
func (x *LogoutRequest) ProtoReflect() protoreflect.Message {
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
mi := &file_pbacl_acl_proto_msgTypes[4]
if protoimpl.UnsafeEnabled && x != nil {
ms := protoimpl.X.MessageStateOf(protoimpl.Pointer(x))
if ms.LoadMessageInfo() == nil {
ms.StoreMessageInfo(mi)
}
return ms
}
return mi.MessageOf(x)
}
// Deprecated: Use LogoutRequest.ProtoReflect.Descriptor instead.
func (*LogoutRequest) Descriptor() ([]byte, []int) {
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
return file_pbacl_acl_proto_rawDescGZIP(), []int{4}
}
func (x *LogoutRequest) GetToken() string {
if x != nil {
return x.Token
}
return ""
}
func (x *LogoutRequest) GetDatacenter() string {
if x != nil {
return x.Datacenter
}
return ""
}
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
var File_pbacl_acl_proto protoreflect.FileDescriptor
var file_pbacl_acl_proto_rawDesc = []byte{
0x0a, 0x0f, 0x70, 0x62, 0x61, 0x63, 0x6c, 0x2f, 0x61, 0x63, 0x6c, 0x2e, 0x70, 0x72, 0x6f, 0x74,
0x6f, 0x12, 0x14, 0x68, 0x61, 0x73, 0x68, 0x69, 0x63, 0x6f, 0x72, 0x70, 0x2e, 0x63, 0x6f, 0x6e,
0x73, 0x75, 0x6c, 0x2e, 0x61, 0x63, 0x6c, 0x1a, 0x25, 0x61, 0x6e, 0x6e, 0x6f, 0x74, 0x61, 0x74,
0x69, 0x6f, 0x6e, 0x73, 0x2f, 0x72, 0x61, 0x74, 0x65, 0x6c, 0x69, 0x6d, 0x69, 0x74, 0x2f, 0x72,
0x61, 0x74, 0x65, 0x6c, 0x69, 0x6d, 0x69, 0x74, 0x2e, 0x70, 0x72, 0x6f, 0x74, 0x6f, 0x22, 0x10,
0x0a, 0x0e, 0x4c, 0x6f, 0x67, 0x6f, 0x75, 0x74, 0x52, 0x65, 0x73, 0x70, 0x6f, 0x6e, 0x73, 0x65,
0x22, 0xa9, 0x02, 0x0a, 0x0c, 0x4c, 0x6f, 0x67, 0x69, 0x6e, 0x52, 0x65, 0x71, 0x75, 0x65, 0x73,
0x74, 0x12, 0x1f, 0x0a, 0x0b, 0x61, 0x75, 0x74, 0x68, 0x5f, 0x6d, 0x65, 0x74, 0x68, 0x6f, 0x64,
0x18, 0x01, 0x20, 0x01, 0x28, 0x09, 0x52, 0x0a, 0x61, 0x75, 0x74, 0x68, 0x4d, 0x65, 0x74, 0x68,
0x6f, 0x64, 0x12, 0x21, 0x0a, 0x0c, 0x62, 0x65, 0x61, 0x72, 0x65, 0x72, 0x5f, 0x74, 0x6f, 0x6b,
0x65, 0x6e, 0x18, 0x02, 0x20, 0x01, 0x28, 0x09, 0x52, 0x0b, 0x62, 0x65, 0x61, 0x72, 0x65, 0x72,
0x54, 0x6f, 0x6b, 0x65, 0x6e, 0x12, 0x40, 0x0a, 0x04, 0x6d, 0x65, 0x74, 0x61, 0x18, 0x03, 0x20,
0x03, 0x28, 0x0b, 0x32, 0x2c, 0x2e, 0x68, 0x61, 0x73, 0x68, 0x69, 0x63, 0x6f, 0x72, 0x70, 0x2e,
0x63, 0x6f, 0x6e, 0x73, 0x75, 0x6c, 0x2e, 0x61, 0x63, 0x6c, 0x2e, 0x4c, 0x6f, 0x67, 0x69, 0x6e,
0x52, 0x65, 0x71, 0x75, 0x65, 0x73, 0x74, 0x2e, 0x4d, 0x65, 0x74, 0x61, 0x45, 0x6e, 0x74, 0x72,
0x79, 0x52, 0x04, 0x6d, 0x65, 0x74, 0x61, 0x12, 0x1c, 0x0a, 0x09, 0x6e, 0x61, 0x6d, 0x65, 0x73,
0x70, 0x61, 0x63, 0x65, 0x18, 0x04, 0x20, 0x01, 0x28, 0x09, 0x52, 0x09, 0x6e, 0x61, 0x6d, 0x65,
0x73, 0x70, 0x61, 0x63, 0x65, 0x12, 0x1c, 0x0a, 0x09, 0x70, 0x61, 0x72, 0x74, 0x69, 0x74, 0x69,
0x6f, 0x6e, 0x18, 0x05, 0x20, 0x01, 0x28, 0x09, 0x52, 0x09, 0x70, 0x61, 0x72, 0x74, 0x69, 0x74,
0x69, 0x6f, 0x6e, 0x12, 0x1e, 0x0a, 0x0a, 0x64, 0x61, 0x74, 0x61, 0x63, 0x65, 0x6e, 0x74, 0x65,
0x72, 0x18, 0x06, 0x20, 0x01, 0x28, 0x09, 0x52, 0x0a, 0x64, 0x61, 0x74, 0x61, 0x63, 0x65, 0x6e,
0x74, 0x65, 0x72, 0x1a, 0x37, 0x0a, 0x09, 0x4d, 0x65, 0x74, 0x61, 0x45, 0x6e, 0x74, 0x72, 0x79,
0x12, 0x10, 0x0a, 0x03, 0x6b, 0x65, 0x79, 0x18, 0x01, 0x20, 0x01, 0x28, 0x09, 0x52, 0x03, 0x6b,
0x65, 0x79, 0x12, 0x14, 0x0a, 0x05, 0x76, 0x61, 0x6c, 0x75, 0x65, 0x18, 0x02, 0x20, 0x01, 0x28,
0x09, 0x52, 0x05, 0x76, 0x61, 0x6c, 0x75, 0x65, 0x3a, 0x02, 0x38, 0x01, 0x22, 0x47, 0x0a, 0x0d,
0x4c, 0x6f, 0x67, 0x69, 0x6e, 0x52, 0x65, 0x73, 0x70, 0x6f, 0x6e, 0x73, 0x65, 0x12, 0x36, 0x0a,
0x05, 0x74, 0x6f, 0x6b, 0x65, 0x6e, 0x18, 0x01, 0x20, 0x01, 0x28, 0x0b, 0x32, 0x20, 0x2e, 0x68,
0x61, 0x73, 0x68, 0x69, 0x63, 0x6f, 0x72, 0x70, 0x2e, 0x63, 0x6f, 0x6e, 0x73, 0x75, 0x6c, 0x2e,
0x61, 0x63, 0x6c, 0x2e, 0x4c, 0x6f, 0x67, 0x69, 0x6e, 0x54, 0x6f, 0x6b, 0x65, 0x6e, 0x52, 0x05,
0x74, 0x6f, 0x6b, 0x65, 0x6e, 0x22, 0x4a, 0x0a, 0x0a, 0x4c, 0x6f, 0x67, 0x69, 0x6e, 0x54, 0x6f,
0x6b, 0x65, 0x6e, 0x12, 0x1f, 0x0a, 0x0b, 0x61, 0x63, 0x63, 0x65, 0x73, 0x73, 0x6f, 0x72, 0x5f,
0x69, 0x64, 0x18, 0x01, 0x20, 0x01, 0x28, 0x09, 0x52, 0x0a, 0x61, 0x63, 0x63, 0x65, 0x73, 0x73,
0x6f, 0x72, 0x49, 0x64, 0x12, 0x1b, 0x0a, 0x09, 0x73, 0x65, 0x63, 0x72, 0x65, 0x74, 0x5f, 0x69,
0x64, 0x18, 0x02, 0x20, 0x01, 0x28, 0x09, 0x52, 0x08, 0x73, 0x65, 0x63, 0x72, 0x65, 0x74, 0x49,
0x64, 0x22, 0x45, 0x0a, 0x0d, 0x4c, 0x6f, 0x67, 0x6f, 0x75, 0x74, 0x52, 0x65, 0x71, 0x75, 0x65,
0x73, 0x74, 0x12, 0x14, 0x0a, 0x05, 0x74, 0x6f, 0x6b, 0x65, 0x6e, 0x18, 0x01, 0x20, 0x01, 0x28,
0x09, 0x52, 0x05, 0x74, 0x6f, 0x6b, 0x65, 0x6e, 0x12, 0x1e, 0x0a, 0x0a, 0x64, 0x61, 0x74, 0x61,
0x63, 0x65, 0x6e, 0x74, 0x65, 0x72, 0x18, 0x02, 0x20, 0x01, 0x28, 0x09, 0x52, 0x0a, 0x64, 0x61,
0x74, 0x61, 0x63, 0x65, 0x6e, 0x74, 0x65, 0x72, 0x32, 0xc7, 0x01, 0x0a, 0x0a, 0x41, 0x43, 0x4c,
0x53, 0x65, 0x72, 0x76, 0x69, 0x63, 0x65, 0x12, 0x5a, 0x0a, 0x05, 0x4c, 0x6f, 0x67, 0x69, 0x6e,
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
0x12, 0x22, 0x2e, 0x68, 0x61, 0x73, 0x68, 0x69, 0x63, 0x6f, 0x72, 0x70, 0x2e, 0x63, 0x6f, 0x6e,
0x73, 0x75, 0x6c, 0x2e, 0x61, 0x63, 0x6c, 0x2e, 0x4c, 0x6f, 0x67, 0x69, 0x6e, 0x52, 0x65, 0x71,
0x75, 0x65, 0x73, 0x74, 0x1a, 0x23, 0x2e, 0x68, 0x61, 0x73, 0x68, 0x69, 0x63, 0x6f, 0x72, 0x70,
0x2e, 0x63, 0x6f, 0x6e, 0x73, 0x75, 0x6c, 0x2e, 0x61, 0x63, 0x6c, 0x2e, 0x4c, 0x6f, 0x67, 0x69,
0x6e, 0x52, 0x65, 0x73, 0x70, 0x6f, 0x6e, 0x73, 0x65, 0x22, 0x08, 0xe2, 0x86, 0x04, 0x04, 0x08,
0x03, 0x10, 0x01, 0x12, 0x5d, 0x0a, 0x06, 0x4c, 0x6f, 0x67, 0x6f, 0x75, 0x74, 0x12, 0x23, 0x2e,
0x68, 0x61, 0x73, 0x68, 0x69, 0x63, 0x6f, 0x72, 0x70, 0x2e, 0x63, 0x6f, 0x6e, 0x73, 0x75, 0x6c,
0x2e, 0x61, 0x63, 0x6c, 0x2e, 0x4c, 0x6f, 0x67, 0x6f, 0x75, 0x74, 0x52, 0x65, 0x71, 0x75, 0x65,
0x73, 0x74, 0x1a, 0x24, 0x2e, 0x68, 0x61, 0x73, 0x68, 0x69, 0x63, 0x6f, 0x72, 0x70, 0x2e, 0x63,
0x6f, 0x6e, 0x73, 0x75, 0x6c, 0x2e, 0x61, 0x63, 0x6c, 0x2e, 0x4c, 0x6f, 0x67, 0x6f, 0x75, 0x74,
0x52, 0x65, 0x73, 0x70, 0x6f, 0x6e, 0x73, 0x65, 0x22, 0x08, 0xe2, 0x86, 0x04, 0x04, 0x08, 0x03,
0x10, 0x01, 0x42, 0xc6, 0x01, 0x0a, 0x18, 0x63, 0x6f, 0x6d, 0x2e, 0x68, 0x61, 0x73, 0x68, 0x69,
0x63, 0x6f, 0x72, 0x70, 0x2e, 0x63, 0x6f, 0x6e, 0x73, 0x75, 0x6c, 0x2e, 0x61, 0x63, 0x6c, 0x42,
0x08, 0x41, 0x63, 0x6c, 0x50, 0x72, 0x6f, 0x74, 0x6f, 0x50, 0x01, 0x5a, 0x2e, 0x67, 0x69, 0x74,
0x68, 0x75, 0x62, 0x2e, 0x63, 0x6f, 0x6d, 0x2f, 0x68, 0x61, 0x73, 0x68, 0x69, 0x63, 0x6f, 0x72,
0x70, 0x2f, 0x63, 0x6f, 0x6e, 0x73, 0x75, 0x6c, 0x2f, 0x70, 0x72, 0x6f, 0x74, 0x6f, 0x2d, 0x70,
0x75, 0x62, 0x6c, 0x69, 0x63, 0x2f, 0x70, 0x62, 0x61, 0x63, 0x6c, 0xa2, 0x02, 0x03, 0x48, 0x43,
0x41, 0xaa, 0x02, 0x14, 0x48, 0x61, 0x73, 0x68, 0x69, 0x63, 0x6f, 0x72, 0x70, 0x2e, 0x43, 0x6f,
0x6e, 0x73, 0x75, 0x6c, 0x2e, 0x41, 0x63, 0x6c, 0xca, 0x02, 0x14, 0x48, 0x61, 0x73, 0x68, 0x69,
0x63, 0x6f, 0x72, 0x70, 0x5c, 0x43, 0x6f, 0x6e, 0x73, 0x75, 0x6c, 0x5c, 0x41, 0x63, 0x6c, 0xe2,
0x02, 0x20, 0x48, 0x61, 0x73, 0x68, 0x69, 0x63, 0x6f, 0x72, 0x70, 0x5c, 0x43, 0x6f, 0x6e, 0x73,
0x75, 0x6c, 0x5c, 0x41, 0x63, 0x6c, 0x5c, 0x47, 0x50, 0x42, 0x4d, 0x65, 0x74, 0x61, 0x64, 0x61,
0x74, 0x61, 0xea, 0x02, 0x16, 0x48, 0x61, 0x73, 0x68, 0x69, 0x63, 0x6f, 0x72, 0x70, 0x3a, 0x3a,
0x43, 0x6f, 0x6e, 0x73, 0x75, 0x6c, 0x3a, 0x3a, 0x41, 0x63, 0x6c, 0x62, 0x06, 0x70, 0x72, 0x6f,
0x74, 0x6f, 0x33,
}
var (
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
file_pbacl_acl_proto_rawDescOnce sync.Once
file_pbacl_acl_proto_rawDescData = file_pbacl_acl_proto_rawDesc
)
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
func file_pbacl_acl_proto_rawDescGZIP() []byte {
file_pbacl_acl_proto_rawDescOnce.Do(func() {
file_pbacl_acl_proto_rawDescData = protoimpl.X.CompressGZIP(file_pbacl_acl_proto_rawDescData)
})
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
return file_pbacl_acl_proto_rawDescData
}
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
var file_pbacl_acl_proto_msgTypes = make([]protoimpl.MessageInfo, 6)
var file_pbacl_acl_proto_goTypes = []interface{}{
(*LogoutResponse)(nil), // 0: hashicorp.consul.acl.LogoutResponse
(*LoginRequest)(nil), // 1: hashicorp.consul.acl.LoginRequest
(*LoginResponse)(nil), // 2: hashicorp.consul.acl.LoginResponse
(*LoginToken)(nil), // 3: hashicorp.consul.acl.LoginToken
(*LogoutRequest)(nil), // 4: hashicorp.consul.acl.LogoutRequest
nil, // 5: hashicorp.consul.acl.LoginRequest.MetaEntry
}
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
var file_pbacl_acl_proto_depIdxs = []int32{
5, // 0: hashicorp.consul.acl.LoginRequest.meta:type_name -> hashicorp.consul.acl.LoginRequest.MetaEntry
3, // 1: hashicorp.consul.acl.LoginResponse.token:type_name -> hashicorp.consul.acl.LoginToken
1, // 2: hashicorp.consul.acl.ACLService.Login:input_type -> hashicorp.consul.acl.LoginRequest
4, // 3: hashicorp.consul.acl.ACLService.Logout:input_type -> hashicorp.consul.acl.LogoutRequest
2, // 4: hashicorp.consul.acl.ACLService.Login:output_type -> hashicorp.consul.acl.LoginResponse
0, // 5: hashicorp.consul.acl.ACLService.Logout:output_type -> hashicorp.consul.acl.LogoutResponse
4, // [4:6] is the sub-list for method output_type
2, // [2:4] is the sub-list for method input_type
2, // [2:2] is the sub-list for extension type_name
2, // [2:2] is the sub-list for extension extendee
0, // [0:2] is the sub-list for field type_name
}
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
func init() { file_pbacl_acl_proto_init() }
func file_pbacl_acl_proto_init() {
if File_pbacl_acl_proto != nil {
return
}
if !protoimpl.UnsafeEnabled {
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
file_pbacl_acl_proto_msgTypes[0].Exporter = func(v interface{}, i int) interface{} {
switch v := v.(*LogoutResponse); i {
case 0:
return &v.state
case 1:
return &v.sizeCache
case 2:
return &v.unknownFields
default:
return nil
}
}
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
file_pbacl_acl_proto_msgTypes[1].Exporter = func(v interface{}, i int) interface{} {
switch v := v.(*LoginRequest); i {
case 0:
return &v.state
case 1:
return &v.sizeCache
case 2:
return &v.unknownFields
default:
return nil
}
}
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
file_pbacl_acl_proto_msgTypes[2].Exporter = func(v interface{}, i int) interface{} {
switch v := v.(*LoginResponse); i {
case 0:
return &v.state
case 1:
return &v.sizeCache
case 2:
return &v.unknownFields
default:
return nil
}
}
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
file_pbacl_acl_proto_msgTypes[3].Exporter = func(v interface{}, i int) interface{} {
switch v := v.(*LoginToken); i {
case 0:
return &v.state
case 1:
return &v.sizeCache
case 2:
return &v.unknownFields
default:
return nil
}
}
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
file_pbacl_acl_proto_msgTypes[4].Exporter = func(v interface{}, i int) interface{} {
switch v := v.(*LogoutRequest); i {
case 0:
return &v.state
case 1:
return &v.sizeCache
case 2:
return &v.unknownFields
default:
return nil
}
}
}
type x struct{}
out := protoimpl.TypeBuilder{
File: protoimpl.DescBuilder{
GoPackagePath: reflect.TypeOf(x{}).PkgPath(),
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
RawDescriptor: file_pbacl_acl_proto_rawDesc,
NumEnums: 0,
NumMessages: 6,
NumExtensions: 0,
NumServices: 1,
},
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
GoTypes: file_pbacl_acl_proto_goTypes,
DependencyIndexes: file_pbacl_acl_proto_depIdxs,
MessageInfos: file_pbacl_acl_proto_msgTypes,
}.Build()
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
File_pbacl_acl_proto = out.File
file_pbacl_acl_proto_rawDesc = nil
file_pbacl_acl_proto_goTypes = nil
file_pbacl_acl_proto_depIdxs = nil
}