[WIP] Support oneof fields in body

[yugui]

• oneof fields have already been supported in path parameters (Support param for field from Oneof definition. #621) and query parameters (Support oneof fields in query params #321).

• This PR replaces Supports oneof fields in more places #416 and fixes oneof fields are not supported as the "body"? #413.

• oneof fields defined in a message in another package.

[Tommy-42]

hey, thanks for your work !

are there any news about this PR ?

[johanbrandhorst]

This seems like it's trying to accomplish the same thing as #570. @yugui are you interested in finishing this?

[Tommy-42]

I've opened a PR to update this branch to master state, see : #759

edit: closed wrong branch used

[johanbrandhorst]

@Tommy-42 if you want to, you can take this branch and rebase on master again, we've fixed the CI generation problems.

[Tommy-42]

@johanbrandhorst thanks you, I'll try to do something today for it

[lopezator]

Is the project alive? Any plans to merge/fix this after more than a year? CC\ @yugui

[johanbrandhorst]

Is the project alive? Any plans to merge/fix this after more than a year? CC\ @yugui

Yes, this project is alive. No, this PR is unlikely to be merged by the original author. Would you be interested in picking up the work in a separate branch?

[lopezator]

@johanbrandhorst thanks! Do you know any workaround to be able to make use of one_of type fields in the meantime?

[johanbrandhorst]

What is the problem with oneof? It looks to me like we test oneof in body fields already.

[hesthub]

Hello, are there any plans to resurrect this PR?
Or is there a more idiomatic way of handling the stated situation nowadays?

[johanbrandhorst]

Hello, are there any plans to resurrect this PR?
Or is there a more idiomatic way of handling the stated situation nowadays?

Please raise a separate issue if you're having a problem with this. This PR is dead.

[aesadde]

Hi 👋 @johanbrandhorst would you accept new PRs for this feature?

It would be cool to be able to use oneof fields in request bodies. I'm facing a use case like the following:

message SimpleMessage {
  ...
  oneof ext {
    int64 en = 6;
    Embedded no = 7;
  }
}

service EchoService {
  rpc EchoBody(SimpleMessage) returns (SimpleMessage) {
    option (google.api.http) = {
      post: "/v1/example/echo_body"
      body: "*"
      additional_bindings {
          put: "/v1/example/echo_body/{id}"
          body: "no"
        }
    };
  }
}

I have a working solution and some tests for this (I'm not too familiar with the codebase but used this closed PR as guidance and #570)

Would be more than happy to submit the PR!

[johanbrandhorst]

Hi @aesadde. We certainly would be interested in that, please feel free to submit another PR. Thanks!