Auto-generated trace library (GAPIC only)

[liyanhui1228]

No description provided.

[dhermes]

ISTM you want to move trace/docs/ to docs/trace/?

Also, please make PRs from branches in your own fork of this repo (rather then making branches directly in this repo).

UPDATE: I now see that #3513 is a PR against your new branch (trace-autogen). I'm not sure I grok the order you want these merges to occur in.

[liyanhui1228]

@dhermes Yeah the docs should live in docs/trace. Will move it later.

And sorry for forgetting to make PRs from my own fork... I remember you told me in last PR though. I spent quite a while separating the previous large PR to two PRs this afternoon because of some weird errors and then forgot that.

#3513 is based on the trace-autogen branch, which is the manual layer on top of the autogen layer. So I think the merging order should be merging the manual one to this autogen branch first then merge the autogen branch to master.

[duggelz]

The trace team is working on adding v2 of the API, timeline hazy, but v1 is in reasonably heavy use and will presumably remain so. The two apis are quite similar, just some renaming and slightly restructuring. It seems reasonable to me to have autogen code for v1 now, add v2 later, and have the manual layer work for both. But @lukesneeringer will have to say for sure.

[duggelz]

Also, my git (lack of skill) is entirely to blame for any problems with these two pull requests, although @liyanhui1228 was much too kind to say so :) We spent a while trying to resurrect the previous pull request from a deleted branch.

[theacodes]

Please don't hesitate to reach out for git issues. I'm a bit of a git surgeon.

…

On Wed, Jun 21, 2017, 2:17 AM Douglas Greiman ***@***.***> wrote: Also, my git (lack of skill) is entirely to blame for any problems with these two pull requests, although @liyanhui1228 <https://github.com/liyanhui1228> was much too kind to say so :) We spent a while trying to resurrect the previous pull request from a deleted branch. — You are receiving this because your review was requested. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#3512 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAPUc6y5M7kYSa2rd7M4P99dSMFZ6A_Cks5sGN-ygaJpZM4N--OD> .

[liyanhui1228]

@lukesneeringer Are there any plan for updating the autogen code to use the v2 API? I have #3513 ongoing based on this PR, so if there are anything needed to be changed in the autogen code please let me know.

[lukesneeringer]

Hi @liyanhui1228,
How did you generate this code? I want to make sure I get proto docstrings added in, is why I ask. It should just entail re-generating with the newest Artman.

Happy to do it and update this PR; I just need to know what you based it off of.

[lukesneeringer]

@lukesneeringer Are there any plan for updating the autogen code to use the v2 API? I have #3513 ongoing based on this PR, so if there are anything needed to be changed in the autogen code please let me know.

This is based off of v1, yes? Most likely they can live side by side.

[liyanhui1228]

@lukesneeringer This is just the one you generated before, I wasn't able to reopen that closed PR so I open a new one for the autogen code. It would be great if you regenerate and update this PR, I just need to know if there is any change for calling the APIs as my manual code PR is based on this.

[lukesneeringer]

A couple minor changes. None of them are strict blockers if you are on a time crunch.

[dhermes]

@liyanhui1228@lukesneeringer This broke the docs build

[liyanhui1228]

@dhermes I'm looking at it right now.

[dhermes]

Thanks!