Casper Meijn

You forgot to mention that there is this error message: ``` Failed to compile protos: Custom { kind: Other, error: "protoc failed: b.proto:4:16: \"FooB.bar\" is already defined in file \"test/b.proto\".\nb.proto:3:9:...

From what I understand, you're saying that `prost-build` is deriving `Copy` for a type it is not supposed to. If it produces code that doesn't compile, that would definitely be...

Hi @pushkarmoi I understand your concerns. I have a plan to make the types used in generated fields more configurable. `Cow` could be one of the new types. However, I...

> I’m also interested in your ideas for implementing Cow support more effectively. If you can share any specifics, it would help guide the implementation. That would be a refactor...

So a boxed `oneof` field produces invalid code. The tests for `boxed` are clearly lacking. Upstream protobuf defines a `TestAllTypesProto2` type. We already use that for roundtrip tests. I feel...

> > I think this test will pass without the other changes. > > I'm not sure what you mean by "other changes" here. When I only apply the changes...

> But it seems not useful at all to `box` a `string`. I agree, a `Box` doesn't make sense. Maybe the code generator should prevent a string from being boxed....

The code you provide looks good to me. I do something similar and that works as expected. This feels to me that you are importing the wrong `struct Timestamp`. As...

> > Can you explain why this is useful? > > When the `Debug` implementation is not needed, we can use `prost_build::Config::skip_debug()` to skip implementing `Debug`. However as the `Messages`...

I am preparing a breaking release now. I want to include this PR. Can you solve the merge conflict?