Add CQG CMS API protobuf Haskell package

[cdepillabout]

This PR adds an initial cqg-cms-api-proto Haskell package. This package contains Haskell modules generated from the CQG CMS API protobuf files.

This is currently using the proto-lens functionality for manually generating Haskell modules from the protobuf files: https://github.com/google/proto-lens/tree/master?tab=readme-ov-file#manually-running-the-protocol-compiler

Most of the commits in this PR won't be too interesting to review, but the downloading and generation script may be slightly interesting to review (cqg-cms-api-proto/generate.sh).

[cdepillabout]

Having these Haskell modules all be named Proto.* feels somewhat unfortunate. It feels like it would be better if we could name them something like CQG.Proto.CMS.ApiLimit1, but it doesn't appear that the proto-lens library has any way of generating modules with a different naming scheme.

[GambolingPangolin]

This sounds like it would pretty straightforward to rename the modules as part of running generate.sh. I agree that we should put them into the namespace that we want.

[GambolingPangolin]

Also, how do you feel about formatting the code as part of generation?

[cdepillabout]

This sounds like it would pretty straightforward to rename the modules as part of running generate.sh

I imagine we could do this with some mvs and seds, but it would be something we might have to fiddle with again in the future when upgrading the proto-lens version. I'm also not sure how big of an advantage it would be.

I'm imagining we have this cqg-cms-api-proto library, which just contains the generated Haskell modules, like in this PR.

And then we have a separate library like cqg-cms-api-client, which contains the higher-level functions, intended for use by end-users (which in this case, would be our FCM libraries in the bitnomial repo).

Right now, my plan is to set up the cqg-cms-api-client package so it is fully-usable as-is, and re-exports everything necessary from the cqg-cms-api-proto library. So end-users wouldn't have to touch the cqg-cms-api-proto library at all, it would just be an internal implementation detail.

As long as end-users don't have to directly use cqg-cms-api-proto, I imagine it would be fine to leave the module names as Proto.CMS.* and Proto.Common.*.

how do you feel about formatting the code as part of generation?

I think this would be relatively straightforward to add, but:

1. The generated code is so verbose that it is pretty hard to read. I don't think that a different formatting style would make it much easier.
2. In my experience, proto-lens follows a pretty good pattern, so the generated protobuf Haskell modules are pretty easy to use once you get the hang of proto-lens. In practice it feels easier to look at the haddocks or the underlying .proto files (as opposed to the source of the generated Haskell files).
3. It appears that the generated code at least has a consistent formatting (even if it is not the formatting style we normally use).

[notion-workspace]

Add Protobuf Generator