Open atul161 opened 3 years ago
Does it mean the omit
field option could not work?
FYI: https://github.com/ysugimoto/grpc-graphql-gateway/blob/master/include/graphql/graphql.proto#L177
Hi @ysugimoto ,
As we know there are multiple standard protofiles provided by Google currently which is open source.
Some of are empty protobuf , timestamp etc.
In similar way Google also standardized a proto file which is called Field Mask
.
You may read about this https://github.com/protocolbuffers/protobuf/blob/master/src/google/protobuf/field_mask.proto
So , currently your package doesn't generate file when we use fieldmask inside protocol buffer.
I think you need to add suport in ptypes. https://github.com/ysugimoto/grpc-graphql-gateway/tree/master/ptypes
Thanks, I didn't know that ptype. https://github.com/protocolbuffers/protobuf/blob/master/src/google/protobuf/field_mask.proto describes its spec and I looked at it.
The spec mentions about oneof, but currently, this package does not support oneof field, therefor we may need to implement oneof spec first.
Will you work upon oneOf field or will I sent you a PR?
I appreciate it if you make a PR.
In case of fieldmask (inside proto message) incorrect graphql file generated.