Prost Crate Naming Conventions

[purkhusid]

Wanted to start a discussion around the current naming conventions in the prost rules provided by rules_rust.

The prost rules set the crate name to the name of the proto_library that is being compiled.
This approach is very prone to clashes e.g. the following folder structure:

/src
    /protobuf
        service1/
            /models
                models.proto
        service2/
            /models
                models.proto

In this folder structure the common way to name the proto_library target would be models_proto (Which is the convention that gazelle uses) but that causes issues if there is a consumer that needs both service1/models and service2/models .

I think it makes sense to change the naming conventions or make them configurable since this is a very likely issue when you have a repo with a large protobuf codebase.

Options:

• Change the naming convention to include the package path in the crate name
  • The example above would end with src_protobuf_service1_models_models_proto and src_protobuf_service2_models_models_proto
• Make the convention configurable on the prost toolchain
  • The toolchain could provide a crate_naming_convention which accepts proto_name and package_name where proto_name would keep the current convention but package_name would include the package path in the crate name