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

Eliminate use of alias field_mask package #1008

Closed
Tracked by #113366
liggitt opened this issue May 18, 2023 · 3 comments · Fixed by #1042
Closed
Tracked by #113366

Eliminate use of alias field_mask package #1008

liggitt opened this issue May 18, 2023 · 3 comments · Fixed by #1042
Assignees
Labels
priority: p3 Desirable enhancement or fix. May not be included in next release. type: feature request ‘Nice-to-have’ improvement, new feature or different behavior or design.

Comments

@liggitt
Copy link
Contributor

liggitt commented May 18, 2023

The "google.golang.org/genproto/protobuf/..." package tree just contains aliases to known protobuf types.

It looks like newer protoc-gen-go versions correctly reference the known types in google.golang.org/protobuf/types/known/ and most generated packages have been updated recently.

Only three packages in genproto still reference anything within this package tree:

git grep "google.golang.org/genproto/protobuf/"
googleapis/cloud/irm/v1alpha2/incidents_service.pb.go:  field_mask "google.golang.org/genproto/protobuf/field_mask"
googleapis/devtools/containeranalysis/v1alpha1/containeranalysis.pb.go: field_mask "google.golang.org/genproto/protobuf/field_mask"
googleapis/devtools/remoteworkers/v1test2/tasks.pb.go:  field_mask "google.golang.org/genproto/protobuf/field_mask"

Can those be regenerated with a newer protoc-gen-go to reference the canonical type?

Eliminating use of the google.golang.org/genproto/protobuf/field_mask package would simplify kubernetes/kubernetes#113366 and remove the need for a submodule for the google.golang.org/genproto/protobuf package

@liggitt liggitt added priority: p3 Desirable enhancement or fix. May not be included in next release. type: feature request ‘Nice-to-have’ improvement, new feature or different behavior or design. labels May 18, 2023
@liggitt
Copy link
Contributor Author

liggitt commented May 18, 2023

cc @quartzmo

@liggitt
Copy link
Contributor Author

liggitt commented May 18, 2023

we might also want to mark the protobuf packages which are just alias packages now as deprecated to prompt people to switch to the canonical packages

@quartzmo
Copy link
Member

quartzmo commented Aug 2, 2023

It looks like all three files can be deleted as obsolete, is that correct @codyoss ?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
priority: p3 Desirable enhancement or fix. May not be included in next release. type: feature request ‘Nice-to-have’ improvement, new feature or different behavior or design.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants