Fix weird protobuf changes #232
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
it now gets a file URI which confused the logic to search for the next pubspec.yaml to gather the package name.
This ended up in taking the file name as a package name which changed for protobug from "protobuf.dart" to "internal.dart" causing dart_apitool to detect a change.
Additionally package refs ('package:xx') were not treated correctly
devmil
requested review from
adamgic,
fabiomcarneiro,
fwagner,
klink182 and
marafelismino
as code owners
devmil
changed the title
adamgic
reviewed
Jul 23, 2025
adamgic
approved these changes
Jul 24, 2025
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Description
in a PR of protobuf there were some hints of weird dart_apitool behavior (google/protobuf.dart#1026)
The main issue was that parameter type changes are detected that are none (TypeX changed to TypeX)
To investigate this issue more easily I also added git support for the package ref (solving #204 ).
And while trying get rid of all wrong changes I also fixed (parts of) #228 (private top level functions). I still need to check for other private types, though.
There were two major issues that are now fixed:
_onVisitFunctionElementdid the right checks but this method was also used for top level and local functions that called into their super method of the RecursiveElementVisitor making it iterating through all parameters regardlessType of Change