[v2] Add skip interceptor

[XSAM]

Resolve #363

It's hard to transfer a interceptors.UnaryServerInterceptor into interceptors.Reporter, so I use the old way to implement this feature.

[codecov-io]

Codecov Report

Merging #364 (6695dad) into v2 (a79558a) will decrease coverage by 7.68%.
The diff coverage is 89.18%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##               v2     #364      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   83.58%   75.90%   -7.69%     
==========================================
  Files          30       31       +1     
  Lines         932      776     -156     
==========================================
- Hits          779      589     -190     
- Misses        114      139      +25     
- Partials       39       48       +9     

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
chain.go	0.00% <ø> (-90.91%)	⬇️
interceptors/logging/payload.go	79.24% <50.00%> (-3.37%)	⬇️
interceptors/retry/retry.go	66.66% <70.00%> (-9.58%)	⬇️
interceptors/skip/interceptor.go	71.42% <71.42%> (ø)
interceptors/logging/interceptors.go	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
interceptors/logging/logging.go	61.53% <100.00%> (-6.21%)	⬇️
interceptors/ratelimit/ratelimit.go	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
interceptors/reporter.go	61.53% <100.00%> (-0.97%)	⬇️
interceptors/server.go	85.71% <100.00%> (+0.42%)	⬆️
interceptors/tags/fieldextractor.go	82.75% <100.00%> (-2.54%)	⬇️
... and 31 more

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 38f54d9...6695dad. Read the comment docs.

[bwplotka]

Nice, I like it, but curious why denylist was chosen instead of allowlist approach? 🤔

To me allowlist approach might be more comprehensive. E.g If you want to use logging middleware only on service X. I will add SKIP -> Logging, filter service != x Doable but quite big inversion (:

I think we could consider this, at the end it's flexible enough anyway, just curious what is easier to use.

Skip might be nice for auth aspect, so by default you deny from auth etc.. Maybe does not matter that much 🤗

LGTM, overall 💪

[XSAM]

To me allowlist approach might be more comprehensive.

I agree with that. At the first design, If service == x then skip seems good, but the function is called filter. Therefore, filter service != x seems better.

[XSAM]

@johanbrandhorst Shall we merge it?

[johanbrandhorst]

LGTM, but could we add this new interceptor to the README too please? Sorry for the delayed review.

[google-cla]

All (the pull request submitter and all commit authors) CLAs are signed, but one or more commits were authored or co-authored by someone other than the pull request submitter.

We need to confirm that all authors are ok with their commits being contributed to this project. Please have them confirm that by leaving a comment that contains only @googlebot I consent. in this pull request.

Note to project maintainer: There may be cases where the author cannot leave a comment, or the comment is not properly detected as consent. In those cases, you can manually confirm consent of the commit author(s), and set the cla label to yes (if enabled on your project).

ℹ️ Googlers: Go here for more info.

[XSAM]

@googlebot I consent.

[google-cla]

All (the pull request submitter and all commit authors) CLAs are signed, but one or more commits were authored or co-authored by someone other than the pull request submitter.

We need to confirm that all authors are ok with their commits being contributed to this project. Please have them confirm that by leaving a comment that contains only @googlebot I consent. in this pull request.

Note to project maintainer: There may be cases where the author cannot leave a comment, or the comment is not properly detected as consent. In those cases, you can manually confirm consent of the commit author(s), and set the cla label to yes (if enabled on your project).

ℹ️ Googlers: Go here for more info.

[XSAM]

@johanbrandhorst It seems like the CLA bot is not working.

[johanbrandhorst]

I think @bwplotka might need to consent too.

[XSAM]

@bwplotka Shall we?

[yashrsharma44]

Yeah, seems like @bwplotka also needs to consent 😛

[bwplotka]

Sorry for lag, if you think it makes sense I am happy as well. LGTM!

[bwplotka]

@googlebot I consent.

[google-cla]

All (the pull request submitter and all commit authors) CLAs are signed, but one or more commits were authored or co-authored by someone other than the pull request submitter.

We need to confirm that all authors are ok with their commits being contributed to this project. Please have them confirm that by leaving a comment that contains only @googlebot I consent. in this pull request.

Note to project maintainer: There may be cases where the author cannot leave a comment, or the comment is not properly detected as consent. In those cases, you can manually confirm consent of the commit author(s), and set the cla label to yes (if enabled on your project).

ℹ️ Googlers: Go here for more info.

[bwplotka]

All is good to me, so merging.