chore: Bump to GoLang v1.21

[shahzadlone]

Relevant issue(s)

• Resolves chore: Bump to GoLang v1.21 #2194
• Resolves Update token ONLY_DEFRADB_REPO_CI_PAT expired end of 2023 on dev account #2196

Description

• This is a routine version bump of GoLang, the previous bump was done in (chore: Bump to GoLang v1.20 #1689)
• Also updates the golang version for AWS AMI generation.
• Updated the ONLY_DEFRADB_REPO_CI_PAT token as the terraform build would fail otherwise as the token expired starting of this year.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Comparison is base (58dc727) 74.19% compared to head (2f68943) 74.32%.
Report is 3 commits behind head on develop.

❗ Current head 2f68943 differs from pull request most recent head 615b969. Consider uploading reports for the commit 615b969 to get more accurate results

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##           develop    #2195      +/-   ##
===========================================
+ Coverage    74.19%   74.32%   +0.13%     
===========================================
  Files          256      256              
  Lines        25508    25508              
===========================================
+ Hits         18924    18957      +33     
+ Misses        5290     5265      -25     
+ Partials      1294     1286       -8     

Flag	Coverage Δ
all-tests	74.32% <ø> (+0.13%)	⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

see 12 files with indirect coverage changes

---

Continue to review full report in Codecov by Sentry.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update d07bfd1...615b969. Read the comment docs.

[AndrewSisley]

LGTM :)

[AndrewSisley]

Actually wait

[AndrewSisley]

I wanted to quickly undo my approval sorry - I think this should be merged after the release. We gain nothing by including this in 0.9, and it is a sudden (and uncommunicated) break from our Go version policy and could be really annoying for some users.

Much better to wait until just after 0.9 is cut IMO, is only a day or so to wait.

[shahzadlone]

I wanted to quickly undo my approval sorry - I think this should be merged after the release. We gain nothing by including this in 0.9, and it is a sudden (and uncommunicated) break from our Go version policy and could be really annoying for some users.

Much better to wait until just after 0.9 is cut IMO, is only a day or so to wait.

Thanks for your input, I have a strong disagreement for the following reasons:

1. The release binaries are unaffected regardless of which version is used.

2. Most likely, those who want to build from source, would be using a branch anyway.

3. This break is quite minimal in comparison to other breaking changes we have pushed in this release (which will also be communicated through the similar channels as this one, i.e. commit log message and by updating of documents everywhere).

4. Most importantly, in 2 weeks go is scheduled to release there v1.22 version. Our next release is going to be roughly in 8 weeks. Now that means users who don't follow (2) and want to build source at that exact release commit, will now be using an "unsupported version of GO" for at least the remaining 6 weeks until we make a new release: Each major Go release is supported until there are two newer major releases. For example, Go 1.5 was supported until the Go 1.7 release, and Go 1.6 was supported until the Go 1.8 release. https://go.dev/doc/devel/release

So in my opinion we do gain something by including this in 0.9 🤣

[fredcarle]

At this stage I'm quite ok with updating to 1.21. To most of our partners, at least to my knowledge, the impact will be negligible as they mostly use pre-compile binaries.

[fredcarle]

I'm good with this change :)

[AndrewSisley]

Thanks for your input...

RE:
(1) - I was talking about embedded users.
(2) - I don't think we can claim this. And even if we were able to accurately track that that doesn't mean we should not care about anyone actually using the releases.
(3) - Other breaking changes are documented and expected. They also don't require people to update their own runtime, possibly to a version that could be incompatible with other stuff they are using leaving them stuck on 0.8.
(4) - This is an inherent weakness in our Go version policy and not specific to this PR, are you suggesting we abandon it permanently?

I won't block this, but I will not approve it either (dismiss my review if you want to merge). I don't understand why you are rushing to merge this a few hours early (my understanding is that the only reason for breaking process with this is for ACP, and ACP is not going to be snuck into the 0.9 release anyway).

[shahzadlone]

Discussed on discord, will wait for the release to merge.

[AndrewSisley]

0.9 Released, approving :)

[source-devs]

Terraform Format and Style success

Terraform Initialization success

Terraform Validation success

Terraform Plan success

Show Plan

Terraform Plan Output:
data.aws_ami.ami: Reading...
aws_security_group.sg: Refreshing state... [id=sg-03ba6f1f9cd118f43]
data.aws_ami.ami: Read complete after 0s [id=ami-0b436d9dc6b1762be]
aws_instance.instance: Refreshing state... [id=i-087b6a34e288d739d]

No changes. Your infrastructure matches the configuration.

Terraform has compared your real infrastructure against your configuration
and found no differences, so no changes are needed.

Pushed By: @shahzadlone
SHA: 615b9693eea59a9f8e22363cc018cd44198a4d7a