Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Question: Could we have a v1? #42

Closed
easwars opened this issue Nov 25, 2020 · 14 comments
Closed

Question: Could we have a v1? #42

easwars opened this issue Nov 25, 2020 · 14 comments

Comments

@easwars
Copy link

easwars commented Nov 25, 2020

gRPC-Go has a dependency on the pb.gos published from here. #40 changed the path of these pb.gos. Currently gRPC-Go's depends on a specific commit.

It would be bad for us to depend on a v0 for any non-experimental features that we support. Is there a plan to publish a v1 anytime soon?

Thank you.

@easwars
Copy link
Author

easwars commented Nov 25, 2020

FYI: @dfawley @menghanl

@easwars
Copy link
Author

easwars commented Jan 26, 2021

Is there any update on this?
Thanks.

@ozkar99
Copy link

ozkar99 commented Feb 1, 2021

+1 on this, also depending on the old path, can we get a tag so we can pin to the old version?

@dfawley
Copy link
Member

dfawley commented Feb 4, 2021

@htuch - this is important for gRPC to be able to declare it has "stable" xDS support. We can't have our builds breaking because something here is moved or deleted.

@markdroth
Copy link
Collaborator

We should consider whether we can migrate these protos from cncf/udpa to cncf/xds before tagging a v1.

@dfawley
Copy link
Member

dfawley commented Feb 4, 2021

Deleting the generated Go code from this repo would break "stable" releases of gRPC-Go. We really should have raised this as an urgent, blocking issue before our first release with xDS support, but nobody noticed it at the time. In fact, it was a cleanup CL that moved us from using our own generated pb.gos (also a Really Bad Idea because of the global protobuf registry) to relying upon this repo (grpc/grpc-go#3449). And we are proposing to use it more in https://github.com/markdroth/proposal/blob/xds_http_filters/A39-xds-http-filters.md#xds-api-fields.

@dfawley
Copy link
Member

dfawley commented Feb 4, 2021

Actually, it's even more important for us to have a stable release of https://github.com/envoyproxy/go-control-plane, since we use protos from there extensively, vs. only one from here (ORCA).

@htuch
Copy link
Collaborator

htuch commented Feb 5, 2021

Got it. @dfawley can you explain what the migration path we could do to cncf/xds that doesn't break gRPC Go is? I want to do this migration soon (maybe sooner if it helps this issue).

@dfawley
Copy link
Member

dfawley commented Feb 5, 2021

We should be able to migrate envoyproxy/envoy and envoyproxy/go-control-plane to reference cncf/xds instead of this repo at any time. Doing this ASAP would be great. Then we'd have to work out how/when to delete this repo.

Once this repo is no longer needed, we could do patch releases for the previous 3 minor releases of grpc-go to reference the latest envoyproxy/go-control-plane release and cncf/xds (hopefully both at a v1!). We should still leave this repo here for at least 6-12 months after that, to provide a reasonable amount of time for users to update. Technically someone could be broken no matter how long we wait, but we have to move forward at some point.

@htuch
Copy link
Collaborator

htuch commented Feb 5, 2021

SG, I'll do the migration in the next day or two. At the same time, we will do the master to main in both places.

@dfawley
Copy link
Member

dfawley commented Feb 26, 2021

@htuch are there any updates on this effort?

@htuch
Copy link
Collaborator

htuch commented Mar 3, 2021

@dfawley I've started the cncf/xds migration. I'll try get some progress happening by early next week to get us to the right point here.

@htuch
Copy link
Collaborator

htuch commented Mar 11, 2021

When cncf/xds#5 merges, cncf/xds will be live, we can then validate against Envoy repo and cut the release.

@htuch
Copy link
Collaborator

htuch commented Mar 22, 2021

@dfawley let's move discussion to cncf/xds#2.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

5 participants