Joe Tsai

I'm going to re-open this issue, but it does not mean that we're going to support this. I'd like to see more discussion on the feasibility of this. Some thoughts:...

> Use "proto2". This is a non-starter since it would require a rewrite of all proto definitions (and, I think, code). Note that `proto2` is also specified to require UTF-8....

> I think a global option for disabling utf-8 validation would be the best thing. I've advocated for this, but the protobuf team is afraid of prolific use of the...

Nice find. The comment in the file you pointed at says: > It wouldn't roundtrip byte arrays that were not valid UTF-8 encoded strings This seems to suggest that they...

Hi, may we get more information about the use case for this? The `encoding.BinaryMarshaler` and `encoding.BinaryUnmarshaler` were intended to be used by data serialization packages. At least in the standard...

Just wondering, wouldn't `store` be more versatile with the following? `func store(key string, model interface{}) error { ... }` And under the hood, `store` uses `gob`? It does add a...

I think there's a valid use case for add `encoding.BinaryMarshaler` and `encoding.BinaryUnmarshaler`.

\cc @neild. I vaguely remember that we addressed this in the v2 re-write of `protoc-gen-go`.

Just as a sanity check, 1) what does C++ do? and 2) do they even support this? I ask because my understanding is that C++ also has the per-file property...

> Conflicts are resolved, but only if you supply all the sources for a Go package in the same `protoc` action This seems reasonable to me since `protoc` already has...