Mara Schulke

Maybe we can implement buffrs new?

I think we should get #224 over the line!

Hi @poliorcetics, this looks like it will mess up the import system a lot to me; have you considered the implications of this change? My main question here is what...

For documentation: We should probably solve theses issues by defining the include field in cargo manifests to zip up the protobufs in the crate tarball. See https://doc.rust-lang.org/cargo/reference/manifest.html#the-exclude-and-include-fields --- A todo...

Well you can do that @asmello – it's just not very neat (in my personal opinion) to check in artifacts of package managers. If if fits your needs better then...

Hi @dgehriger, yes I agree with the beauty of hierarchical package definitions! The problem with the proposed solution (as much as id like to implement it) is that it silently...

Also fwiw @asmello if I understand the docs of cargo correctly: ``` include = ["*", "proto/vendor"] ``` Should do the trick?

Edit: If you are *only* talking about the directory that buffrs installs its files into yes that is infact right. The reason we have not implemented this change is that...

I believe this is happening due to an outdated version of buffrs! I can't find the error branch. Can you give me the version that resulted in this error? @Tpt

Related to #22