Skip to content

Conversation

@juslesan
Copy link
Contributor

@juslesan juslesan commented Oct 23, 2024

Summary

Removing generated protobuf files from the public repo

Future improvements

  • What should we do with the proto-rpc package's generate protobuf code? Currently the solution requires generateing the code for eslint, check, and test separately. We don't want to include the building of the test files in pre-build.
  • Could look into pruning all of the bootstrapped packages in the Dockerfile. Based on a quick test the size of the image is the same if only the node is pruned or if all sub packages are pruned separately.

@linear
Copy link

linear bot commented Oct 23, 2024

@github-actions github-actions bot added network Related to Network Package dht Related to DHT package proto-rpc sdk ci Related to CI configuration labels Oct 23, 2024
juslesan added a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 3, 2024
Reverting PR #2820 due to backwards incompatibility with production. The
typeUrl of the PeerDescriptors in the Any protobuf message has changes
from `dht.PeerDescriptor` to `peerDescriptor.PeerDescriptor` in this
change. This makes it impossible to parse the stream entry points stored
stored in the DHT causing stream joining to not work.

The clean up of generated protobuf code will be implemented in #2842
@juslesan juslesan requested a review from teogeb December 5, 2024 14:10
@juslesan juslesan marked this pull request as ready for review December 19, 2024 12:44
@juslesan juslesan merged commit 84ec8fb into main Dec 19, 2024
24 checks passed
@juslesan juslesan deleted the NET-1371 branch December 19, 2024 14:33
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

ci Related to CI configuration dht Related to DHT package network Related to Network Package proto-rpc sdk

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants