Is a .proto package declaration a requirement?

[CorinJG]

In the example in the docs, the *.rs file generated during the build has a name which matches the package declaration given in the .proto file.

i.e. package snazzy.items; is declared in the .proto file, and lib.rs contains:

pub mod items {
    include!(concat!(env!("OUT_DIR"), "/snazzy.items.rs"));
}

I suspect therefore you must provide a package declaration in every .proto file when using Prost. Is this the case?

Just asking as my schema is already in use in other languages without any package declarations in .proto files, and adding them can affect things like namespaces and packages of generated code in other languages requiring a few adjustments in client code I'd prefer to avoid but not the end of the world. Thanks

[LucioFranco]

I believe its required last I checked. It should be easy to test though :D

[CorinJG]

I suspect what prost_build does is use the .proto package foo; declarations as the respective target filenames for the emitted bindings. Totally reasonable, just means introducing package declarations into all existing .proto files in the protocol, and since they import "*.prost" each other this means modifying the namespaces of the external message types across all files etc, just wondered if there was an alternative but I've done it now anyway:)

[CorinJG]

Just found this