[PROPOSAL] Separate generated code or remove "THIS CODE IS GENERATED" comments

[AarjavP]

What are you proposing?

Remove

//----------------------------------------------------
// THIS CODE IS GENERATED. MANUAL EDITS WILL BE LOST.
//----------------------------------------------------

where it does not make sense, or put the generated source code into a separate directory (source set) for clear separation.

How did you come up with this proposal?

I was browsing the code to see if I could reuse the models/classes for a kotlin client when I came across many of these comments. From #197 #182 opensearch-project/opensearch-clients#19 I see that the comment may be incorrect, at least for now.

What is the user experience going to be?

should be transparent to users of the library, but hopefully this makes the code more maintainable for contributors.

Why should it be built? Any reason not to?

Maybe keeping common package code together? But I think the benefits of having a separate directory outweigh this point, even if only to make sure the code generator does not overwrite non-generated files.

What will it take to execute?

time and review

What are remaining open questions?

I have not yet worked with smithy, so are there any considerations to be made for that given it may be used in the near future?
Also, I am assuming that the entirety of the client is not (or will not be) generated. Is that a correct assumption?

[AarjavP]

Should I go ahead and create PR for this?

[dblock]

Should I go ahead and create PR for this?

Please! No permission needed.

[VachaShah]

Done in #598