You can not select more than 25 topics Topics must start with a letter or number, can include dashes ('-') and can be up to 35 characters long.
consul/proto/private/pbpeerstream/peerstream.pb.go

1143 lines
46 KiB

// Copyright (c) HashiCorp, Inc.
[COMPLIANCE] License changes (#18443) * Adding explicit MPL license for sub-package This directory and its subdirectories (packages) contain files licensed with the MPLv2 `LICENSE` file in this directory and are intentionally licensed separately from the BSL `LICENSE` file at the root of this repository. * Adding explicit MPL license for sub-package This directory and its subdirectories (packages) contain files licensed with the MPLv2 `LICENSE` file in this directory and are intentionally licensed separately from the BSL `LICENSE` file at the root of this repository. * Updating the license from MPL to Business Source License Going forward, this project will be licensed under the Business Source License v1.1. Please see our blog post for more details at <Blog URL>, FAQ at www.hashicorp.com/licensing-faq, and details of the license at www.hashicorp.com/bsl. * add missing license headers * Update copyright file headers to BUSL-1.1 * Update copyright file headers to BUSL-1.1 * Update copyright file headers to BUSL-1.1 * Update copyright file headers to BUSL-1.1 * Update copyright file headers to BUSL-1.1 * Update copyright file headers to BUSL-1.1 * Update copyright file headers to BUSL-1.1 * Update copyright file headers to BUSL-1.1 * Update copyright file headers to BUSL-1.1 * Update copyright file headers to BUSL-1.1 * Update copyright file headers to BUSL-1.1 * Update copyright file headers to BUSL-1.1 * Update copyright file headers to BUSL-1.1 * Update copyright file headers to BUSL-1.1 * Update copyright file headers to BUSL-1.1 --------- Co-authored-by: hashicorp-copywrite[bot] <110428419+hashicorp-copywrite[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
1 year ago
// SPDX-License-Identifier: BUSL-1.1
// Code generated by protoc-gen-go. DO NOT EDIT.
// versions:
[Cloud][CC-6925] Updates to pushing server state (#19682) * Upgrade hcp-sdk-go to latest version v0.73 Changes: - go get github.com/hashicorp/hcp-sdk-go - go mod tidy * From upgrade: regenerate protobufs for upgrade from 1.30 to 1.31 Ran: `make proto` Slack: https://hashicorp.slack.com/archives/C0253EQ5B40/p1701105418579429 * From upgrade: fix mock interface implementation After upgrading, there is the following compile error: cannot use &mockHCPCfg{} (value of type *mockHCPCfg) as "github.com/hashicorp/hcp-sdk-go/config".HCPConfig value in return statement: *mockHCPCfg does not implement "github.com/hashicorp/hcp-sdk-go/config".HCPConfig (missing method Logout) Solution: update the mock to have the missing Logout method * From upgrade: Lint: remove usage of deprecated req.ServerState.TLS Due to upgrade, linting is erroring due to usage of a newly deprecated field 22:47:56 [consul]: make lint --> Running golangci-lint (.) agent/hcp/testing.go:157:24: SA1019: req.ServerState.TLS is deprecated: use server_tls.internal_rpc instead. (staticcheck) time.Until(time.Time(req.ServerState.TLS.CertExpiry)).Hours()/24, ^ * From upgrade: adjust oidc error message From the upgrade, this test started failing: === FAIL: internal/go-sso/oidcauth TestOIDC_ClaimsFromAuthCode/failed_code_exchange (re-run 2) (0.01s) oidc_test.go:393: unexpected error: Provider login failed: Error exchanging oidc code: oauth2: "invalid_grant" "unexpected auth code" Prior to the upgrade, the error returned was: ``` Provider login failed: Error exchanging oidc code: oauth2: cannot fetch token: 401 Unauthorized\nResponse: {\"error\":\"invalid_grant\",\"error_description\":\"unexpected auth code\"}\n ``` Now the error returned is as below and does not contain "cannot fetch token" ``` Provider login failed: Error exchanging oidc code: oauth2: "invalid_grant" "unexpected auth code" ``` * Update AgentPushServerState structs with new fields HCP-side changes for the new fields are in: https://github.com/hashicorp/cloud-global-network-manager-service/pull/1195/files * Minor refactor for hcpServerStatus to abstract tlsInfo into struct This will make it easier to set the same tls-info information to both - status.TLS (deprecated field) - status.ServerTLSMetadata (new field to use instead) * Update hcpServerStatus to parse out information for new fields Changes: - Improve error message and handling (encountered some issues and was confused) - Set new field TLSInfo.CertIssuer - Collect certificate authority metadata and set on TLSInfo.CertificateAuthorities - Set TLSInfo on both server.TLS and server.ServerTLSMetadata.InternalRPC * Update serverStatusToHCP to convert new fields to GNM rpc * Add changelog * Feedback: connect.ParseCert, caCerts * Feedback: refactor and unit test server status * Feedback: test to use expected struct * Feedback: certificate with intermediate * Feedback: catch no leaf, remove expectedErr * Feedback: update todos with jira ticket * Feedback: mock tlsConfigurator
12 months ago
// protoc-gen-go v1.31.0
// protoc (unknown)
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
// source: private/pbpeerstream/peerstream.proto
package pbpeerstream
import (
2 years ago
_ "github.com/hashicorp/consul/proto-public/annotations/ratelimit"
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
pbpeering "github.com/hashicorp/consul/proto/private/pbpeering"
pbservice "github.com/hashicorp/consul/proto/private/pbservice"
pbstatus "github.com/hashicorp/consul/proto/private/pbstatus"
protoreflect "google.golang.org/protobuf/reflect/protoreflect"
protoimpl "google.golang.org/protobuf/runtime/protoimpl"
anypb "google.golang.org/protobuf/types/known/anypb"
reflect "reflect"
sync "sync"
)
const (
// Verify that this generated code is sufficiently up-to-date.
_ = protoimpl.EnforceVersion(20 - protoimpl.MinVersion)
// Verify that runtime/protoimpl is sufficiently up-to-date.
_ = protoimpl.EnforceVersion(protoimpl.MaxVersion - 20)
)
// Operation enumerates supported operations for replicated resources.
type Operation int32
const (
Operation_OPERATION_UNSPECIFIED Operation = 0
// UPSERT represents a create or update event.
Operation_OPERATION_UPSERT Operation = 1
)
// Enum value maps for Operation.
var (
Operation_name = map[int32]string{
0: "OPERATION_UNSPECIFIED",
1: "OPERATION_UPSERT",
}
Operation_value = map[string]int32{
"OPERATION_UNSPECIFIED": 0,
"OPERATION_UPSERT": 1,
}
)
func (x Operation) Enum() *Operation {
p := new(Operation)
*p = x
return p
}
func (x Operation) String() string {
return protoimpl.X.EnumStringOf(x.Descriptor(), protoreflect.EnumNumber(x))
}
func (Operation) Descriptor() protoreflect.EnumDescriptor {
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
return file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_enumTypes[0].Descriptor()
}
func (Operation) Type() protoreflect.EnumType {
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
return &file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_enumTypes[0]
}
func (x Operation) Number() protoreflect.EnumNumber {
return protoreflect.EnumNumber(x)
}
// Deprecated: Use Operation.Descriptor instead.
func (Operation) EnumDescriptor() ([]byte, []int) {
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
return file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_rawDescGZIP(), []int{0}
}
type ReplicationMessage struct {
state protoimpl.MessageState
sizeCache protoimpl.SizeCache
unknownFields protoimpl.UnknownFields
// Types that are assignable to Payload:
//
// *ReplicationMessage_Open_
// *ReplicationMessage_Request_
// *ReplicationMessage_Response_
// *ReplicationMessage_Terminated_
// *ReplicationMessage_Heartbeat_
Payload isReplicationMessage_Payload `protobuf_oneof:"Payload"`
}
func (x *ReplicationMessage) Reset() {
*x = ReplicationMessage{}
if protoimpl.UnsafeEnabled {
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
mi := &file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_msgTypes[0]
ms := protoimpl.X.MessageStateOf(protoimpl.Pointer(x))
ms.StoreMessageInfo(mi)
}
}
func (x *ReplicationMessage) String() string {
return protoimpl.X.MessageStringOf(x)
}
func (*ReplicationMessage) ProtoMessage() {}
func (x *ReplicationMessage) ProtoReflect() protoreflect.Message {
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
mi := &file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_msgTypes[0]
if protoimpl.UnsafeEnabled && x != nil {
ms := protoimpl.X.MessageStateOf(protoimpl.Pointer(x))
if ms.LoadMessageInfo() == nil {
ms.StoreMessageInfo(mi)
}
return ms
}
return mi.MessageOf(x)
}
// Deprecated: Use ReplicationMessage.ProtoReflect.Descriptor instead.
func (*ReplicationMessage) Descriptor() ([]byte, []int) {
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
return file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_rawDescGZIP(), []int{0}
}
func (m *ReplicationMessage) GetPayload() isReplicationMessage_Payload {
if m != nil {
return m.Payload
}
return nil
}
func (x *ReplicationMessage) GetOpen() *ReplicationMessage_Open {
if x, ok := x.GetPayload().(*ReplicationMessage_Open_); ok {
return x.Open
}
return nil
}
func (x *ReplicationMessage) GetRequest() *ReplicationMessage_Request {
if x, ok := x.GetPayload().(*ReplicationMessage_Request_); ok {
return x.Request
}
return nil
}
func (x *ReplicationMessage) GetResponse() *ReplicationMessage_Response {
if x, ok := x.GetPayload().(*ReplicationMessage_Response_); ok {
return x.Response
}
return nil
}
func (x *ReplicationMessage) GetTerminated() *ReplicationMessage_Terminated {
if x, ok := x.GetPayload().(*ReplicationMessage_Terminated_); ok {
return x.Terminated
}
return nil
}
func (x *ReplicationMessage) GetHeartbeat() *ReplicationMessage_Heartbeat {
if x, ok := x.GetPayload().(*ReplicationMessage_Heartbeat_); ok {
return x.Heartbeat
}
return nil
}
type isReplicationMessage_Payload interface {
isReplicationMessage_Payload()
}
type ReplicationMessage_Open_ struct {
Open *ReplicationMessage_Open `protobuf:"bytes,1,opt,name=open,proto3,oneof"`
}
type ReplicationMessage_Request_ struct {
Request *ReplicationMessage_Request `protobuf:"bytes,2,opt,name=request,proto3,oneof"`
}
type ReplicationMessage_Response_ struct {
Response *ReplicationMessage_Response `protobuf:"bytes,3,opt,name=response,proto3,oneof"`
}
type ReplicationMessage_Terminated_ struct {
Terminated *ReplicationMessage_Terminated `protobuf:"bytes,4,opt,name=terminated,proto3,oneof"`
}
type ReplicationMessage_Heartbeat_ struct {
Heartbeat *ReplicationMessage_Heartbeat `protobuf:"bytes,5,opt,name=heartbeat,proto3,oneof"`
}
func (*ReplicationMessage_Open_) isReplicationMessage_Payload() {}
func (*ReplicationMessage_Request_) isReplicationMessage_Payload() {}
func (*ReplicationMessage_Response_) isReplicationMessage_Payload() {}
func (*ReplicationMessage_Terminated_) isReplicationMessage_Payload() {}
func (*ReplicationMessage_Heartbeat_) isReplicationMessage_Payload() {}
// LeaderAddress is sent when the peering service runs on a consul node
// that is not a leader. The node either lost leadership, or never was a leader.
type LeaderAddress struct {
state protoimpl.MessageState
sizeCache protoimpl.SizeCache
unknownFields protoimpl.UnknownFields
// address is an ip:port best effort hint at what could be the cluster leader's address
Address string `protobuf:"bytes,1,opt,name=address,proto3" json:"address,omitempty"`
}
func (x *LeaderAddress) Reset() {
*x = LeaderAddress{}
if protoimpl.UnsafeEnabled {
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
mi := &file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_msgTypes[1]
ms := protoimpl.X.MessageStateOf(protoimpl.Pointer(x))
ms.StoreMessageInfo(mi)
}
}
func (x *LeaderAddress) String() string {
return protoimpl.X.MessageStringOf(x)
}
func (*LeaderAddress) ProtoMessage() {}
func (x *LeaderAddress) ProtoReflect() protoreflect.Message {
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
mi := &file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_msgTypes[1]
if protoimpl.UnsafeEnabled && x != nil {
ms := protoimpl.X.MessageStateOf(protoimpl.Pointer(x))
if ms.LoadMessageInfo() == nil {
ms.StoreMessageInfo(mi)
}
return ms
}
return mi.MessageOf(x)
}
// Deprecated: Use LeaderAddress.ProtoReflect.Descriptor instead.
func (*LeaderAddress) Descriptor() ([]byte, []int) {
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
return file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_rawDescGZIP(), []int{1}
}
func (x *LeaderAddress) GetAddress() string {
if x != nil {
return x.Address
}
return ""
}
// ExportedService is one of the types of data returned via peer stream replication.
type ExportedService struct {
state protoimpl.MessageState
sizeCache protoimpl.SizeCache
unknownFields protoimpl.UnknownFields
Nodes []*pbservice.CheckServiceNode `protobuf:"bytes,1,rep,name=Nodes,proto3" json:"Nodes,omitempty"`
}
func (x *ExportedService) Reset() {
*x = ExportedService{}
if protoimpl.UnsafeEnabled {
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
mi := &file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_msgTypes[2]
ms := protoimpl.X.MessageStateOf(protoimpl.Pointer(x))
ms.StoreMessageInfo(mi)
}
}
func (x *ExportedService) String() string {
return protoimpl.X.MessageStringOf(x)
}
func (*ExportedService) ProtoMessage() {}
func (x *ExportedService) ProtoReflect() protoreflect.Message {
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
mi := &file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_msgTypes[2]
if protoimpl.UnsafeEnabled && x != nil {
ms := protoimpl.X.MessageStateOf(protoimpl.Pointer(x))
if ms.LoadMessageInfo() == nil {
ms.StoreMessageInfo(mi)
}
return ms
}
return mi.MessageOf(x)
}
// Deprecated: Use ExportedService.ProtoReflect.Descriptor instead.
func (*ExportedService) Descriptor() ([]byte, []int) {
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
return file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_rawDescGZIP(), []int{2}
}
func (x *ExportedService) GetNodes() []*pbservice.CheckServiceNode {
if x != nil {
return x.Nodes
}
return nil
}
// ExportedServiceList is one of the types of data returned via peer stream replication.
type ExportedServiceList struct {
state protoimpl.MessageState
sizeCache protoimpl.SizeCache
unknownFields protoimpl.UnknownFields
// The identifiers for the services being exported.
Services []string `protobuf:"bytes,1,rep,name=Services,proto3" json:"Services,omitempty"`
}
func (x *ExportedServiceList) Reset() {
*x = ExportedServiceList{}
if protoimpl.UnsafeEnabled {
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
mi := &file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_msgTypes[3]
ms := protoimpl.X.MessageStateOf(protoimpl.Pointer(x))
ms.StoreMessageInfo(mi)
}
}
func (x *ExportedServiceList) String() string {
return protoimpl.X.MessageStringOf(x)
}
func (*ExportedServiceList) ProtoMessage() {}
func (x *ExportedServiceList) ProtoReflect() protoreflect.Message {
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
mi := &file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_msgTypes[3]
if protoimpl.UnsafeEnabled && x != nil {
ms := protoimpl.X.MessageStateOf(protoimpl.Pointer(x))
if ms.LoadMessageInfo() == nil {
ms.StoreMessageInfo(mi)
}
return ms
}
return mi.MessageOf(x)
}
// Deprecated: Use ExportedServiceList.ProtoReflect.Descriptor instead.
func (*ExportedServiceList) Descriptor() ([]byte, []int) {
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
return file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_rawDescGZIP(), []int{3}
}
func (x *ExportedServiceList) GetServices() []string {
if x != nil {
return x.Services
}
return nil
}
type ExchangeSecretRequest struct {
state protoimpl.MessageState
sizeCache protoimpl.SizeCache
unknownFields protoimpl.UnknownFields
// PeerID is the ID of the peering, as determined by the cluster that generated the
// peering token.
PeerID string `protobuf:"bytes,1,opt,name=PeerID,proto3" json:"PeerID,omitempty"`
// EstablishmentSecret is the one-time-use secret encoded in the received peering token.
EstablishmentSecret string `protobuf:"bytes,2,opt,name=EstablishmentSecret,proto3" json:"EstablishmentSecret,omitempty"`
}
func (x *ExchangeSecretRequest) Reset() {
*x = ExchangeSecretRequest{}
if protoimpl.UnsafeEnabled {
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
mi := &file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_msgTypes[4]
ms := protoimpl.X.MessageStateOf(protoimpl.Pointer(x))
ms.StoreMessageInfo(mi)
}
}
func (x *ExchangeSecretRequest) String() string {
return protoimpl.X.MessageStringOf(x)
}
func (*ExchangeSecretRequest) ProtoMessage() {}
func (x *ExchangeSecretRequest) ProtoReflect() protoreflect.Message {
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
mi := &file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_msgTypes[4]
if protoimpl.UnsafeEnabled && x != nil {
ms := protoimpl.X.MessageStateOf(protoimpl.Pointer(x))
if ms.LoadMessageInfo() == nil {
ms.StoreMessageInfo(mi)
}
return ms
}
return mi.MessageOf(x)
}
// Deprecated: Use ExchangeSecretRequest.ProtoReflect.Descriptor instead.
func (*ExchangeSecretRequest) Descriptor() ([]byte, []int) {
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
return file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_rawDescGZIP(), []int{4}
}
func (x *ExchangeSecretRequest) GetPeerID() string {
if x != nil {
return x.PeerID
}
return ""
}
func (x *ExchangeSecretRequest) GetEstablishmentSecret() string {
if x != nil {
return x.EstablishmentSecret
}
return ""
}
type ExchangeSecretResponse struct {
state protoimpl.MessageState
sizeCache protoimpl.SizeCache
unknownFields protoimpl.UnknownFields
// StreamSecret is the long-lived secret to be used for authentication with the
// peering stream handler.
StreamSecret string `protobuf:"bytes,1,opt,name=StreamSecret,proto3" json:"StreamSecret,omitempty"`
}
func (x *ExchangeSecretResponse) Reset() {
*x = ExchangeSecretResponse{}
if protoimpl.UnsafeEnabled {
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
mi := &file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_msgTypes[5]
ms := protoimpl.X.MessageStateOf(protoimpl.Pointer(x))
ms.StoreMessageInfo(mi)
}
}
func (x *ExchangeSecretResponse) String() string {
return protoimpl.X.MessageStringOf(x)
}
func (*ExchangeSecretResponse) ProtoMessage() {}
func (x *ExchangeSecretResponse) ProtoReflect() protoreflect.Message {
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
mi := &file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_msgTypes[5]
if protoimpl.UnsafeEnabled && x != nil {
ms := protoimpl.X.MessageStateOf(protoimpl.Pointer(x))
if ms.LoadMessageInfo() == nil {
ms.StoreMessageInfo(mi)
}
return ms
}
return mi.MessageOf(x)
}
// Deprecated: Use ExchangeSecretResponse.ProtoReflect.Descriptor instead.
func (*ExchangeSecretResponse) Descriptor() ([]byte, []int) {
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
return file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_rawDescGZIP(), []int{5}
}
func (x *ExchangeSecretResponse) GetStreamSecret() string {
if x != nil {
return x.StreamSecret
}
return ""
}
// Open is the initial message send by a dialing peer to establish the peering stream.
type ReplicationMessage_Open struct {
state protoimpl.MessageState
sizeCache protoimpl.SizeCache
unknownFields protoimpl.UnknownFields
// An identifier for the peer making the request.
// This identifier is provisioned by the serving peer prior to the request from the dialing peer.
PeerID string `protobuf:"bytes,1,opt,name=PeerID,proto3" json:"PeerID,omitempty"`
// StreamSecretID contains the long-lived secret from stream authn/authz.
StreamSecretID string `protobuf:"bytes,2,opt,name=StreamSecretID,proto3" json:"StreamSecretID,omitempty"`
// Remote contains metadata about the remote peer.
Remote *pbpeering.RemoteInfo `protobuf:"bytes,3,opt,name=Remote,proto3" json:"Remote,omitempty"`
}
func (x *ReplicationMessage_Open) Reset() {
*x = ReplicationMessage_Open{}
if protoimpl.UnsafeEnabled {
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
mi := &file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_msgTypes[6]
ms := protoimpl.X.MessageStateOf(protoimpl.Pointer(x))
ms.StoreMessageInfo(mi)
}
}
func (x *ReplicationMessage_Open) String() string {
return protoimpl.X.MessageStringOf(x)
}
func (*ReplicationMessage_Open) ProtoMessage() {}
func (x *ReplicationMessage_Open) ProtoReflect() protoreflect.Message {
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
mi := &file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_msgTypes[6]
if protoimpl.UnsafeEnabled && x != nil {
ms := protoimpl.X.MessageStateOf(protoimpl.Pointer(x))
if ms.LoadMessageInfo() == nil {
ms.StoreMessageInfo(mi)
}
return ms
}
return mi.MessageOf(x)
}
// Deprecated: Use ReplicationMessage_Open.ProtoReflect.Descriptor instead.
func (*ReplicationMessage_Open) Descriptor() ([]byte, []int) {
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
return file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_rawDescGZIP(), []int{0, 0}
}
func (x *ReplicationMessage_Open) GetPeerID() string {
if x != nil {
return x.PeerID
}
return ""
}
func (x *ReplicationMessage_Open) GetStreamSecretID() string {
if x != nil {
return x.StreamSecretID
}
return ""
}
func (x *ReplicationMessage_Open) GetRemote() *pbpeering.RemoteInfo {
if x != nil {
return x.Remote
}
return nil
}
// A Request requests to subscribe to a resource of a given type.
type ReplicationMessage_Request struct {
state protoimpl.MessageState
sizeCache protoimpl.SizeCache
unknownFields protoimpl.UnknownFields
// An identifier for the peer making the request.
// This identifier is provisioned by the serving peer prior to the request from the dialing peer.
PeerID string `protobuf:"bytes,1,opt,name=PeerID,proto3" json:"PeerID,omitempty"`
// ResponseNonce corresponding to that of the response being ACKed or NACKed.
// Initial subscription requests will have an empty nonce.
// The nonce is generated and incremented by the exporting peer.
// TODO
ResponseNonce string `protobuf:"bytes,2,opt,name=ResponseNonce,proto3" json:"ResponseNonce,omitempty"`
// The type URL for the resource being requested or ACK/NACKed.
ResourceURL string `protobuf:"bytes,3,opt,name=ResourceURL,proto3" json:"ResourceURL,omitempty"`
// The error if the previous response was not applied successfully.
// This field is empty in the first subscription request.
Error *pbstatus.Status `protobuf:"bytes,5,opt,name=Error,proto3" json:"Error,omitempty"`
}
func (x *ReplicationMessage_Request) Reset() {
*x = ReplicationMessage_Request{}
if protoimpl.UnsafeEnabled {
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
mi := &file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_msgTypes[7]
ms := protoimpl.X.MessageStateOf(protoimpl.Pointer(x))
ms.StoreMessageInfo(mi)
}
}
func (x *ReplicationMessage_Request) String() string {
return protoimpl.X.MessageStringOf(x)
}
func (*ReplicationMessage_Request) ProtoMessage() {}
func (x *ReplicationMessage_Request) ProtoReflect() protoreflect.Message {
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
mi := &file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_msgTypes[7]
if protoimpl.UnsafeEnabled && x != nil {
ms := protoimpl.X.MessageStateOf(protoimpl.Pointer(x))
if ms.LoadMessageInfo() == nil {
ms.StoreMessageInfo(mi)
}
return ms
}
return mi.MessageOf(x)
}
// Deprecated: Use ReplicationMessage_Request.ProtoReflect.Descriptor instead.
func (*ReplicationMessage_Request) Descriptor() ([]byte, []int) {
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
return file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_rawDescGZIP(), []int{0, 1}
}
func (x *ReplicationMessage_Request) GetPeerID() string {
if x != nil {
return x.PeerID
}
return ""
}
func (x *ReplicationMessage_Request) GetResponseNonce() string {
if x != nil {
return x.ResponseNonce
}
return ""
}
func (x *ReplicationMessage_Request) GetResourceURL() string {
if x != nil {
return x.ResourceURL
}
return ""
}
func (x *ReplicationMessage_Request) GetError() *pbstatus.Status {
if x != nil {
return x.Error
}
return nil
}
// A Response contains resources corresponding to a subscription request.
type ReplicationMessage_Response struct {
state protoimpl.MessageState
sizeCache protoimpl.SizeCache
unknownFields protoimpl.UnknownFields
// Nonce identifying a response in a stream.
Nonce string `protobuf:"bytes,1,opt,name=Nonce,proto3" json:"Nonce,omitempty"`
// The type URL of resource being returned.
ResourceURL string `protobuf:"bytes,2,opt,name=ResourceURL,proto3" json:"ResourceURL,omitempty"`
// An identifier for the resource being returned.
// This could be the SPIFFE ID of the service.
ResourceID string `protobuf:"bytes,3,opt,name=ResourceID,proto3" json:"ResourceID,omitempty"`
// The resource being returned.
Resource *anypb.Any `protobuf:"bytes,4,opt,name=Resource,proto3" json:"Resource,omitempty"`
// REQUIRED. The operation to be performed in relation to the resource.
Operation Operation `protobuf:"varint,5,opt,name=operation,proto3,enum=hashicorp.consul.internal.peerstream.Operation" json:"operation,omitempty"`
}
func (x *ReplicationMessage_Response) Reset() {
*x = ReplicationMessage_Response{}
if protoimpl.UnsafeEnabled {
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
mi := &file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_msgTypes[8]
ms := protoimpl.X.MessageStateOf(protoimpl.Pointer(x))
ms.StoreMessageInfo(mi)
}
}
func (x *ReplicationMessage_Response) String() string {
return protoimpl.X.MessageStringOf(x)
}
func (*ReplicationMessage_Response) ProtoMessage() {}
func (x *ReplicationMessage_Response) ProtoReflect() protoreflect.Message {
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
mi := &file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_msgTypes[8]
if protoimpl.UnsafeEnabled && x != nil {
ms := protoimpl.X.MessageStateOf(protoimpl.Pointer(x))
if ms.LoadMessageInfo() == nil {
ms.StoreMessageInfo(mi)
}
return ms
}
return mi.MessageOf(x)
}
// Deprecated: Use ReplicationMessage_Response.ProtoReflect.Descriptor instead.
func (*ReplicationMessage_Response) Descriptor() ([]byte, []int) {
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
return file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_rawDescGZIP(), []int{0, 2}
}
func (x *ReplicationMessage_Response) GetNonce() string {
if x != nil {
return x.Nonce
}
return ""
}
func (x *ReplicationMessage_Response) GetResourceURL() string {
if x != nil {
return x.ResourceURL
}
return ""
}
func (x *ReplicationMessage_Response) GetResourceID() string {
if x != nil {
return x.ResourceID
}
return ""
}
func (x *ReplicationMessage_Response) GetResource() *anypb.Any {
if x != nil {
return x.Resource
}
return nil
}
func (x *ReplicationMessage_Response) GetOperation() Operation {
if x != nil {
return x.Operation
}
return Operation_OPERATION_UNSPECIFIED
}
// Terminated is sent when a peering is deleted locally.
// This message signals to the peer that they should clean up their local state about the peering.
type ReplicationMessage_Terminated struct {
state protoimpl.MessageState
sizeCache protoimpl.SizeCache
unknownFields protoimpl.UnknownFields
}
func (x *ReplicationMessage_Terminated) Reset() {
*x = ReplicationMessage_Terminated{}
if protoimpl.UnsafeEnabled {
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
mi := &file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_msgTypes[9]
ms := protoimpl.X.MessageStateOf(protoimpl.Pointer(x))
ms.StoreMessageInfo(mi)
}
}
func (x *ReplicationMessage_Terminated) String() string {
return protoimpl.X.MessageStringOf(x)
}
func (*ReplicationMessage_Terminated) ProtoMessage() {}
func (x *ReplicationMessage_Terminated) ProtoReflect() protoreflect.Message {
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
mi := &file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_msgTypes[9]
if protoimpl.UnsafeEnabled && x != nil {
ms := protoimpl.X.MessageStateOf(protoimpl.Pointer(x))
if ms.LoadMessageInfo() == nil {
ms.StoreMessageInfo(mi)
}
return ms
}
return mi.MessageOf(x)
}
// Deprecated: Use ReplicationMessage_Terminated.ProtoReflect.Descriptor instead.
func (*ReplicationMessage_Terminated) Descriptor() ([]byte, []int) {
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
return file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_rawDescGZIP(), []int{0, 3}
}
// Heartbeat is sent to verify that the connection is still active.
type ReplicationMessage_Heartbeat struct {
state protoimpl.MessageState
sizeCache protoimpl.SizeCache
unknownFields protoimpl.UnknownFields
}
func (x *ReplicationMessage_Heartbeat) Reset() {
*x = ReplicationMessage_Heartbeat{}
if protoimpl.UnsafeEnabled {
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
mi := &file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_msgTypes[10]
ms := protoimpl.X.MessageStateOf(protoimpl.Pointer(x))
ms.StoreMessageInfo(mi)
}
}
func (x *ReplicationMessage_Heartbeat) String() string {
return protoimpl.X.MessageStringOf(x)
}
func (*ReplicationMessage_Heartbeat) ProtoMessage() {}
func (x *ReplicationMessage_Heartbeat) ProtoReflect() protoreflect.Message {
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
mi := &file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_msgTypes[10]
if protoimpl.UnsafeEnabled && x != nil {
ms := protoimpl.X.MessageStateOf(protoimpl.Pointer(x))
if ms.LoadMessageInfo() == nil {
ms.StoreMessageInfo(mi)
}
return ms
}
return mi.MessageOf(x)
}
// Deprecated: Use ReplicationMessage_Heartbeat.ProtoReflect.Descriptor instead.
func (*ReplicationMessage_Heartbeat) Descriptor() ([]byte, []int) {
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
return file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_rawDescGZIP(), []int{0, 4}
}
var File_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto protoreflect.FileDescriptor
var file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_rawDesc = []byte{
0x0a, 0x25, 0x70, 0x72, 0x69, 0x76, 0x61, 0x74, 0x65, 0x2f, 0x70, 0x62, 0x70, 0x65, 0x65, 0x72,
0x73, 0x74, 0x72, 0x65, 0x61, 0x6d, 0x2f, 0x70, 0x65, 0x65, 0x72, 0x73, 0x74, 0x72, 0x65, 0x61,
0x6d, 0x2e, 0x70, 0x72, 0x6f, 0x74, 0x6f, 0x12, 0x24, 0x68, 0x61, 0x73, 0x68, 0x69, 0x63, 0x6f,
0x72, 0x70, 0x2e, 0x63, 0x6f, 0x6e, 0x73, 0x75, 0x6c, 0x2e, 0x69, 0x6e, 0x74, 0x65, 0x72, 0x6e,
0x61, 0x6c, 0x2e, 0x70, 0x65, 0x65, 0x72, 0x73, 0x74, 0x72, 0x65, 0x61, 0x6d, 0x1a, 0x25, 0x61,
0x6e, 0x6e, 0x6f, 0x74, 0x61, 0x74, 0x69, 0x6f, 0x6e, 0x73, 0x2f, 0x72, 0x61, 0x74, 0x65, 0x6c,
0x69, 0x6d, 0x69, 0x74, 0x2f, 0x72, 0x61, 0x74, 0x65, 0x6c, 0x69, 0x6d, 0x69, 0x74, 0x2e, 0x70,
0x72, 0x6f, 0x74, 0x6f, 0x1a, 0x19, 0x67, 0x6f, 0x6f, 0x67, 0x6c, 0x65, 0x2f, 0x70, 0x72, 0x6f,
0x74, 0x6f, 0x62, 0x75, 0x66, 0x2f, 0x61, 0x6e, 0x79, 0x2e, 0x70, 0x72, 0x6f, 0x74, 0x6f, 0x1a,
0x1f, 0x70, 0x72, 0x69, 0x76, 0x61, 0x74, 0x65, 0x2f, 0x70, 0x62, 0x70, 0x65, 0x65, 0x72, 0x69,
0x6e, 0x67, 0x2f, 0x70, 0x65, 0x65, 0x72, 0x69, 0x6e, 0x67, 0x2e, 0x70, 0x72, 0x6f, 0x74, 0x6f,
0x1a, 0x1c, 0x70, 0x72, 0x69, 0x76, 0x61, 0x74, 0x65, 0x2f, 0x70, 0x62, 0x73, 0x65, 0x72, 0x76,
0x69, 0x63, 0x65, 0x2f, 0x6e, 0x6f, 0x64, 0x65, 0x2e, 0x70, 0x72, 0x6f, 0x74, 0x6f, 0x1a, 0x1d,
0x70, 0x72, 0x69, 0x76, 0x61, 0x74, 0x65, 0x2f, 0x70, 0x62, 0x73, 0x74, 0x61, 0x74, 0x75, 0x73,
0x2f, 0x73, 0x74, 0x61, 0x74, 0x75, 0x73, 0x2e, 0x70, 0x72, 0x6f, 0x74, 0x6f, 0x22, 0xbb, 0x08,
0x0a, 0x12, 0x52, 0x65, 0x70, 0x6c, 0x69, 0x63, 0x61, 0x74, 0x69, 0x6f, 0x6e, 0x4d, 0x65, 0x73,
0x73, 0x61, 0x67, 0x65, 0x12, 0x53, 0x0a, 0x04, 0x6f, 0x70, 0x65, 0x6e, 0x18, 0x01, 0x20, 0x01,
0x28, 0x0b, 0x32, 0x3d, 0x2e, 0x68, 0x61, 0x73, 0x68, 0x69, 0x63, 0x6f, 0x72, 0x70, 0x2e, 0x63,
0x6f, 0x6e, 0x73, 0x75, 0x6c, 0x2e, 0x69, 0x6e, 0x74, 0x65, 0x72, 0x6e, 0x61, 0x6c, 0x2e, 0x70,
0x65, 0x65, 0x72, 0x73, 0x74, 0x72, 0x65, 0x61, 0x6d, 0x2e, 0x52, 0x65, 0x70, 0x6c, 0x69, 0x63,
0x61, 0x74, 0x69, 0x6f, 0x6e, 0x4d, 0x65, 0x73, 0x73, 0x61, 0x67, 0x65, 0x2e, 0x4f, 0x70, 0x65,
0x6e, 0x48, 0x00, 0x52, 0x04, 0x6f, 0x70, 0x65, 0x6e, 0x12, 0x5c, 0x0a, 0x07, 0x72, 0x65, 0x71,
0x75, 0x65, 0x73, 0x74, 0x18, 0x02, 0x20, 0x01, 0x28, 0x0b, 0x32, 0x40, 0x2e, 0x68, 0x61, 0x73,
0x68, 0x69, 0x63, 0x6f, 0x72, 0x70, 0x2e, 0x63, 0x6f, 0x6e, 0x73, 0x75, 0x6c, 0x2e, 0x69, 0x6e,
0x74, 0x65, 0x72, 0x6e, 0x61, 0x6c, 0x2e, 0x70, 0x65, 0x65, 0x72, 0x73, 0x74, 0x72, 0x65, 0x61,
0x6d, 0x2e, 0x52, 0x65, 0x70, 0x6c, 0x69, 0x63, 0x61, 0x74, 0x69, 0x6f, 0x6e, 0x4d, 0x65, 0x73,
0x73, 0x61, 0x67, 0x65, 0x2e, 0x52, 0x65, 0x71, 0x75, 0x65, 0x73, 0x74, 0x48, 0x00, 0x52, 0x07,
0x72, 0x65, 0x71, 0x75, 0x65, 0x73, 0x74, 0x12, 0x5f, 0x0a, 0x08, 0x72, 0x65, 0x73, 0x70, 0x6f,
0x6e, 0x73, 0x65, 0x18, 0x03, 0x20, 0x01, 0x28, 0x0b, 0x32, 0x41, 0x2e, 0x68, 0x61, 0x73, 0x68,
0x69, 0x63, 0x6f, 0x72, 0x70, 0x2e, 0x63, 0x6f, 0x6e, 0x73, 0x75, 0x6c, 0x2e, 0x69, 0x6e, 0x74,
0x65, 0x72, 0x6e, 0x61, 0x6c, 0x2e, 0x70, 0x65, 0x65, 0x72, 0x73, 0x74, 0x72, 0x65, 0x61, 0x6d,
0x2e, 0x52, 0x65, 0x70, 0x6c, 0x69, 0x63, 0x61, 0x74, 0x69, 0x6f, 0x6e, 0x4d, 0x65, 0x73, 0x73,
0x61, 0x67, 0x65, 0x2e, 0x52, 0x65, 0x73, 0x70, 0x6f, 0x6e, 0x73, 0x65, 0x48, 0x00, 0x52, 0x08,
0x72, 0x65, 0x73, 0x70, 0x6f, 0x6e, 0x73, 0x65, 0x12, 0x65, 0x0a, 0x0a, 0x74, 0x65, 0x72, 0x6d,
0x69, 0x6e, 0x61, 0x74, 0x65, 0x64, 0x18, 0x04, 0x20, 0x01, 0x28, 0x0b, 0x32, 0x43, 0x2e, 0x68,
0x61, 0x73, 0x68, 0x69, 0x63, 0x6f, 0x72, 0x70, 0x2e, 0x63, 0x6f, 0x6e, 0x73, 0x75, 0x6c, 0x2e,
0x69, 0x6e, 0x74, 0x65, 0x72, 0x6e, 0x61, 0x6c, 0x2e, 0x70, 0x65, 0x65, 0x72, 0x73, 0x74, 0x72,
0x65, 0x61, 0x6d, 0x2e, 0x52, 0x65, 0x70, 0x6c, 0x69, 0x63, 0x61, 0x74, 0x69, 0x6f, 0x6e, 0x4d,
0x65, 0x73, 0x73, 0x61, 0x67, 0x65, 0x2e, 0x54, 0x65, 0x72, 0x6d, 0x69, 0x6e, 0x61, 0x74, 0x65,
0x64, 0x48, 0x00, 0x52, 0x0a, 0x74, 0x65, 0x72, 0x6d, 0x69, 0x6e, 0x61, 0x74, 0x65, 0x64, 0x12,
0x62, 0x0a, 0x09, 0x68, 0x65, 0x61, 0x72, 0x74, 0x62, 0x65, 0x61, 0x74, 0x18, 0x05, 0x20, 0x01,
0x28, 0x0b, 0x32, 0x42, 0x2e, 0x68, 0x61, 0x73, 0x68, 0x69, 0x63, 0x6f, 0x72, 0x70, 0x2e, 0x63,
0x6f, 0x6e, 0x73, 0x75, 0x6c, 0x2e, 0x69, 0x6e, 0x74, 0x65, 0x72, 0x6e, 0x61, 0x6c, 0x2e, 0x70,
0x65, 0x65, 0x72, 0x73, 0x74, 0x72, 0x65, 0x61, 0x6d, 0x2e, 0x52, 0x65, 0x70, 0x6c, 0x69, 0x63,
0x61, 0x74, 0x69, 0x6f, 0x6e, 0x4d, 0x65, 0x73, 0x73, 0x61, 0x67, 0x65, 0x2e, 0x48, 0x65, 0x61,
0x72, 0x74, 0x62, 0x65, 0x61, 0x74, 0x48, 0x00, 0x52, 0x09, 0x68, 0x65, 0x61, 0x72, 0x74, 0x62,
0x65, 0x61, 0x74, 0x1a, 0x8d, 0x01, 0x0a, 0x04, 0x4f, 0x70, 0x65, 0x6e, 0x12, 0x16, 0x0a, 0x06,
0x50, 0x65, 0x65, 0x72, 0x49, 0x44, 0x18, 0x01, 0x20, 0x01, 0x28, 0x09, 0x52, 0x06, 0x50, 0x65,
0x65, 0x72, 0x49, 0x44, 0x12, 0x26, 0x0a, 0x0e, 0x53, 0x74, 0x72, 0x65, 0x61, 0x6d, 0x53, 0x65,
0x63, 0x72, 0x65, 0x74, 0x49, 0x44, 0x18, 0x02, 0x20, 0x01, 0x28, 0x09, 0x52, 0x0e, 0x53, 0x74,
0x72, 0x65, 0x61, 0x6d, 0x53, 0x65, 0x63, 0x72, 0x65, 0x74, 0x49, 0x44, 0x12, 0x45, 0x0a, 0x06,
0x52, 0x65, 0x6d, 0x6f, 0x74, 0x65, 0x18, 0x03, 0x20, 0x01, 0x28, 0x0b, 0x32, 0x2d, 0x2e, 0x68,
0x61, 0x73, 0x68, 0x69, 0x63, 0x6f, 0x72, 0x70, 0x2e, 0x63, 0x6f, 0x6e, 0x73, 0x75, 0x6c, 0x2e,
0x69, 0x6e, 0x74, 0x65, 0x72, 0x6e, 0x61, 0x6c, 0x2e, 0x70, 0x65, 0x65, 0x72, 0x69, 0x6e, 0x67,
0x2e, 0x52, 0x65, 0x6d, 0x6f, 0x74, 0x65, 0x49, 0x6e, 0x66, 0x6f, 0x52, 0x06, 0x52, 0x65, 0x6d,
0x6f, 0x74, 0x65, 0x1a, 0xa9, 0x01, 0x0a, 0x07, 0x52, 0x65, 0x71, 0x75, 0x65, 0x73, 0x74, 0x12,
0x16, 0x0a, 0x06, 0x50, 0x65, 0x65, 0x72, 0x49, 0x44, 0x18, 0x01, 0x20, 0x01, 0x28, 0x09, 0x52,
0x06, 0x50, 0x65, 0x65, 0x72, 0x49, 0x44, 0x12, 0x24, 0x0a, 0x0d, 0x52, 0x65, 0x73, 0x70, 0x6f,
0x6e, 0x73, 0x65, 0x4e, 0x6f, 0x6e, 0x63, 0x65, 0x18, 0x02, 0x20, 0x01, 0x28, 0x09, 0x52, 0x0d,
0x52, 0x65, 0x73, 0x70, 0x6f, 0x6e, 0x73, 0x65, 0x4e, 0x6f, 0x6e, 0x63, 0x65, 0x12, 0x20, 0x0a,
0x0b, 0x52, 0x65, 0x73, 0x6f, 0x75, 0x72, 0x63, 0x65, 0x55, 0x52, 0x4c, 0x18, 0x03, 0x20, 0x01,
0x28, 0x09, 0x52, 0x0b, 0x52, 0x65, 0x73, 0x6f, 0x75, 0x72, 0x63, 0x65, 0x55, 0x52, 0x4c, 0x12,
0x3e, 0x0a, 0x05, 0x45, 0x72, 0x72, 0x6f, 0x72, 0x18, 0x05, 0x20, 0x01, 0x28, 0x0b, 0x32, 0x28,
2 years ago
0x2e, 0x68, 0x61, 0x73, 0x68, 0x69, 0x63, 0x6f, 0x72, 0x70, 0x2e, 0x63, 0x6f, 0x6e, 0x73, 0x75,
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
0x6c, 0x2e, 0x69, 0x6e, 0x74, 0x65, 0x72, 0x6e, 0x61, 0x6c, 0x2e, 0x73, 0x74, 0x61, 0x74, 0x75,
0x73, 0x2e, 0x53, 0x74, 0x61, 0x74, 0x75, 0x73, 0x52, 0x05, 0x45, 0x72, 0x72, 0x6f, 0x72, 0x1a,
0xe3, 0x01, 0x0a, 0x08, 0x52, 0x65, 0x73, 0x70, 0x6f, 0x6e, 0x73, 0x65, 0x12, 0x14, 0x0a, 0x05,
0x4e, 0x6f, 0x6e, 0x63, 0x65, 0x18, 0x01, 0x20, 0x01, 0x28, 0x09, 0x52, 0x05, 0x4e, 0x6f, 0x6e,
2 years ago
0x63, 0x65, 0x12, 0x20, 0x0a, 0x0b, 0x52, 0x65, 0x73, 0x6f, 0x75, 0x72, 0x63, 0x65, 0x55, 0x52,
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
0x4c, 0x18, 0x02, 0x20, 0x01, 0x28, 0x09, 0x52, 0x0b, 0x52, 0x65, 0x73, 0x6f, 0x75, 0x72, 0x63,
0x65, 0x55, 0x52, 0x4c, 0x12, 0x1e, 0x0a, 0x0a, 0x52, 0x65, 0x73, 0x6f, 0x75, 0x72, 0x63, 0x65,
0x49, 0x44, 0x18, 0x03, 0x20, 0x01, 0x28, 0x09, 0x52, 0x0a, 0x52, 0x65, 0x73, 0x6f, 0x75, 0x72,
0x63, 0x65, 0x49, 0x44, 0x12, 0x30, 0x0a, 0x08, 0x52, 0x65, 0x73, 0x6f, 0x75, 0x72, 0x63, 0x65,
0x18, 0x04, 0x20, 0x01, 0x28, 0x0b, 0x32, 0x14, 0x2e, 0x67, 0x6f, 0x6f, 0x67, 0x6c, 0x65, 0x2e,
0x70, 0x72, 0x6f, 0x74, 0x6f, 0x62, 0x75, 0x66, 0x2e, 0x41, 0x6e, 0x79, 0x52, 0x08, 0x52, 0x65,
0x73, 0x6f, 0x75, 0x72, 0x63, 0x65, 0x12, 0x4d, 0x0a, 0x09, 0x6f, 0x70, 0x65, 0x72, 0x61, 0x74,
0x69, 0x6f, 0x6e, 0x18, 0x05, 0x20, 0x01, 0x28, 0x0e, 0x32, 0x2f, 0x2e, 0x68, 0x61, 0x73, 0x68,
0x69, 0x63, 0x6f, 0x72, 0x70, 0x2e, 0x63, 0x6f, 0x6e, 0x73, 0x75, 0x6c, 0x2e, 0x69, 0x6e, 0x74,
0x65, 0x72, 0x6e, 0x61, 0x6c, 0x2e, 0x70, 0x65, 0x65, 0x72, 0x73, 0x74, 0x72, 0x65, 0x61, 0x6d,
0x2e, 0x4f, 0x70, 0x65, 0x72, 0x61, 0x74, 0x69, 0x6f, 0x6e, 0x52, 0x09, 0x6f, 0x70, 0x65, 0x72,
0x61, 0x74, 0x69, 0x6f, 0x6e, 0x1a, 0x0c, 0x0a, 0x0a, 0x54, 0x65, 0x72, 0x6d, 0x69, 0x6e, 0x61,
0x74, 0x65, 0x64, 0x1a, 0x0b, 0x0a, 0x09, 0x48, 0x65, 0x61, 0x72, 0x74, 0x62, 0x65, 0x61, 0x74,
0x42, 0x09, 0x0a, 0x07, 0x50, 0x61, 0x79, 0x6c, 0x6f, 0x61, 0x64, 0x22, 0x29, 0x0a, 0x0d, 0x4c,
0x65, 0x61, 0x64, 0x65, 0x72, 0x41, 0x64, 0x64, 0x72, 0x65, 0x73, 0x73, 0x12, 0x18, 0x0a, 0x07,
0x61, 0x64, 0x64, 0x72, 0x65, 0x73, 0x73, 0x18, 0x01, 0x20, 0x01, 0x28, 0x09, 0x52, 0x07, 0x61,
0x64, 0x64, 0x72, 0x65, 0x73, 0x73, 0x22, 0x5c, 0x0a, 0x0f, 0x45, 0x78, 0x70, 0x6f, 0x72, 0x74,
0x65, 0x64, 0x53, 0x65, 0x72, 0x76, 0x69, 0x63, 0x65, 0x12, 0x49, 0x0a, 0x05, 0x4e, 0x6f, 0x64,
0x65, 0x73, 0x18, 0x01, 0x20, 0x03, 0x28, 0x0b, 0x32, 0x33, 0x2e, 0x68, 0x61, 0x73, 0x68, 0x69,
2 years ago
0x63, 0x6f, 0x72, 0x70, 0x2e, 0x63, 0x6f, 0x6e, 0x73, 0x75, 0x6c, 0x2e, 0x69, 0x6e, 0x74, 0x65,
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
0x72, 0x6e, 0x61, 0x6c, 0x2e, 0x73, 0x65, 0x72, 0x76, 0x69, 0x63, 0x65, 0x2e, 0x43, 0x68, 0x65,
0x63, 0x6b, 0x53, 0x65, 0x72, 0x76, 0x69, 0x63, 0x65, 0x4e, 0x6f, 0x64, 0x65, 0x52, 0x05, 0x4e,
0x6f, 0x64, 0x65, 0x73, 0x22, 0x31, 0x0a, 0x13, 0x45, 0x78, 0x70, 0x6f, 0x72, 0x74, 0x65, 0x64,
0x53, 0x65, 0x72, 0x76, 0x69, 0x63, 0x65, 0x4c, 0x69, 0x73, 0x74, 0x12, 0x1a, 0x0a, 0x08, 0x53,
0x65, 0x72, 0x76, 0x69, 0x63, 0x65, 0x73, 0x18, 0x01, 0x20, 0x03, 0x28, 0x09, 0x52, 0x08, 0x53,
0x65, 0x72, 0x76, 0x69, 0x63, 0x65, 0x73, 0x22, 0x61, 0x0a, 0x15, 0x45, 0x78, 0x63, 0x68, 0x61,
0x6e, 0x67, 0x65, 0x53, 0x65, 0x63, 0x72, 0x65, 0x74, 0x52, 0x65, 0x71, 0x75, 0x65, 0x73, 0x74,
0x12, 0x16, 0x0a, 0x06, 0x50, 0x65, 0x65, 0x72, 0x49, 0x44, 0x18, 0x01, 0x20, 0x01, 0x28, 0x09,
0x52, 0x06, 0x50, 0x65, 0x65, 0x72, 0x49, 0x44, 0x12, 0x30, 0x0a, 0x13, 0x45, 0x73, 0x74, 0x61,
0x62, 0x6c, 0x69, 0x73, 0x68, 0x6d, 0x65, 0x6e, 0x74, 0x53, 0x65, 0x63, 0x72, 0x65, 0x74, 0x18,
0x02, 0x20, 0x01, 0x28, 0x09, 0x52, 0x13, 0x45, 0x73, 0x74, 0x61, 0x62, 0x6c, 0x69, 0x73, 0x68,
0x6d, 0x65, 0x6e, 0x74, 0x53, 0x65, 0x63, 0x72, 0x65, 0x74, 0x22, 0x3c, 0x0a, 0x16, 0x45, 0x78,
0x63, 0x68, 0x61, 0x6e, 0x67, 0x65, 0x53, 0x65, 0x63, 0x72, 0x65, 0x74, 0x52, 0x65, 0x73, 0x70,
0x6f, 0x6e, 0x73, 0x65, 0x12, 0x22, 0x0a, 0x0c, 0x53, 0x74, 0x72, 0x65, 0x61, 0x6d, 0x53, 0x65,
0x63, 0x72, 0x65, 0x74, 0x18, 0x01, 0x20, 0x01, 0x28, 0x09, 0x52, 0x0c, 0x53, 0x74, 0x72, 0x65,
0x61, 0x6d, 0x53, 0x65, 0x63, 0x72, 0x65, 0x74, 0x2a, 0x3c, 0x0a, 0x09, 0x4f, 0x70, 0x65, 0x72,
0x61, 0x74, 0x69, 0x6f, 0x6e, 0x12, 0x19, 0x0a, 0x15, 0x4f, 0x50, 0x45, 0x52, 0x41, 0x54, 0x49,
0x4f, 0x4e, 0x5f, 0x55, 0x4e, 0x53, 0x50, 0x45, 0x43, 0x49, 0x46, 0x49, 0x45, 0x44, 0x10, 0x00,
0x12, 0x14, 0x0a, 0x10, 0x4f, 0x50, 0x45, 0x52, 0x41, 0x54, 0x49, 0x4f, 0x4e, 0x5f, 0x55, 0x50,
0x53, 0x45, 0x52, 0x54, 0x10, 0x01, 0x32, 0xc1, 0x02, 0x0a, 0x11, 0x50, 0x65, 0x65, 0x72, 0x53,
0x74, 0x72, 0x65, 0x61, 0x6d, 0x53, 0x65, 0x72, 0x76, 0x69, 0x63, 0x65, 0x12, 0x93, 0x01, 0x0a,
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
0x0f, 0x53, 0x74, 0x72, 0x65, 0x61, 0x6d, 0x52, 0x65, 0x73, 0x6f, 0x75, 0x72, 0x63, 0x65, 0x73,
0x12, 0x38, 0x2e, 0x68, 0x61, 0x73, 0x68, 0x69, 0x63, 0x6f, 0x72, 0x70, 0x2e, 0x63, 0x6f, 0x6e,
0x73, 0x75, 0x6c, 0x2e, 0x69, 0x6e, 0x74, 0x65, 0x72, 0x6e, 0x61, 0x6c, 0x2e, 0x70, 0x65, 0x65,
0x72, 0x73, 0x74, 0x72, 0x65, 0x61, 0x6d, 0x2e, 0x52, 0x65, 0x70, 0x6c, 0x69, 0x63, 0x61, 0x74,
0x69, 0x6f, 0x6e, 0x4d, 0x65, 0x73, 0x73, 0x61, 0x67, 0x65, 0x1a, 0x38, 0x2e, 0x68, 0x61, 0x73,
0x68, 0x69, 0x63, 0x6f, 0x72, 0x70, 0x2e, 0x63, 0x6f, 0x6e, 0x73, 0x75, 0x6c, 0x2e, 0x69, 0x6e,
0x74, 0x65, 0x72, 0x6e, 0x61, 0x6c, 0x2e, 0x70, 0x65, 0x65, 0x72, 0x73, 0x74, 0x72, 0x65, 0x61,
0x6d, 0x2e, 0x52, 0x65, 0x70, 0x6c, 0x69, 0x63, 0x61, 0x74, 0x69, 0x6f, 0x6e, 0x4d, 0x65, 0x73,
0x73, 0x61, 0x67, 0x65, 0x22, 0x08, 0xe2, 0x86, 0x04, 0x04, 0x08, 0x02, 0x10, 0x02, 0x28, 0x01,
0x30, 0x01, 0x12, 0x95, 0x01, 0x0a, 0x0e, 0x45, 0x78, 0x63, 0x68, 0x61, 0x6e, 0x67, 0x65, 0x53,
0x65, 0x63, 0x72, 0x65, 0x74, 0x12, 0x3b, 0x2e, 0x68, 0x61, 0x73, 0x68, 0x69, 0x63, 0x6f, 0x72,
0x70, 0x2e, 0x63, 0x6f, 0x6e, 0x73, 0x75, 0x6c, 0x2e, 0x69, 0x6e, 0x74, 0x65, 0x72, 0x6e, 0x61,
0x6c, 0x2e, 0x70, 0x65, 0x65, 0x72, 0x73, 0x74, 0x72, 0x65, 0x61, 0x6d, 0x2e, 0x45, 0x78, 0x63,
0x68, 0x61, 0x6e, 0x67, 0x65, 0x53, 0x65, 0x63, 0x72, 0x65, 0x74, 0x52, 0x65, 0x71, 0x75, 0x65,
0x73, 0x74, 0x1a, 0x3c, 0x2e, 0x68, 0x61, 0x73, 0x68, 0x69, 0x63, 0x6f, 0x72, 0x70, 0x2e, 0x63,
0x6f, 0x6e, 0x73, 0x75, 0x6c, 0x2e, 0x69, 0x6e, 0x74, 0x65, 0x72, 0x6e, 0x61, 0x6c, 0x2e, 0x70,
0x65, 0x65, 0x72, 0x73, 0x74, 0x72, 0x65, 0x61, 0x6d, 0x2e, 0x45, 0x78, 0x63, 0x68, 0x61, 0x6e,
0x67, 0x65, 0x53, 0x65, 0x63, 0x72, 0x65, 0x74, 0x52, 0x65, 0x73, 0x70, 0x6f, 0x6e, 0x73, 0x65,
0x22, 0x08, 0xe2, 0x86, 0x04, 0x04, 0x08, 0x03, 0x10, 0x02, 0x42, 0xa7, 0x02, 0x0a, 0x28, 0x63,
0x6f, 0x6d, 0x2e, 0x68, 0x61, 0x73, 0x68, 0x69, 0x63, 0x6f, 0x72, 0x70, 0x2e, 0x63, 0x6f, 0x6e,
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
0x73, 0x75, 0x6c, 0x2e, 0x69, 0x6e, 0x74, 0x65, 0x72, 0x6e, 0x61, 0x6c, 0x2e, 0x70, 0x65, 0x65,
0x72, 0x73, 0x74, 0x72, 0x65, 0x61, 0x6d, 0x42, 0x0f, 0x50, 0x65, 0x65, 0x72, 0x73, 0x74, 0x72,
0x65, 0x61, 0x6d, 0x50, 0x72, 0x6f, 0x74, 0x6f, 0x50, 0x01, 0x5a, 0x36, 0x67, 0x69, 0x74, 0x68,
0x75, 0x62, 0x2e, 0x63, 0x6f, 0x6d, 0x2f, 0x68, 0x61, 0x73, 0x68, 0x69, 0x63, 0x6f, 0x72, 0x70,
0x2f, 0x63, 0x6f, 0x6e, 0x73, 0x75, 0x6c, 0x2f, 0x70, 0x72, 0x6f, 0x74, 0x6f, 0x2f, 0x70, 0x72,
0x69, 0x76, 0x61, 0x74, 0x65, 0x2f, 0x70, 0x62, 0x70, 0x65, 0x65, 0x72, 0x73, 0x74, 0x72, 0x65,
0x61, 0x6d, 0xa2, 0x02, 0x04, 0x48, 0x43, 0x49, 0x50, 0xaa, 0x02, 0x24, 0x48, 0x61, 0x73, 0x68,
0x69, 0x63, 0x6f, 0x72, 0x70, 0x2e, 0x43, 0x6f, 0x6e, 0x73, 0x75, 0x6c, 0x2e, 0x49, 0x6e, 0x74,
0x65, 0x72, 0x6e, 0x61, 0x6c, 0x2e, 0x50, 0x65, 0x65, 0x72, 0x73, 0x74, 0x72, 0x65, 0x61, 0x6d,
0xca, 0x02, 0x24, 0x48, 0x61, 0x73, 0x68, 0x69, 0x63, 0x6f, 0x72, 0x70, 0x5c, 0x43, 0x6f, 0x6e,
0x73, 0x75, 0x6c, 0x5c, 0x49, 0x6e, 0x74, 0x65, 0x72, 0x6e, 0x61, 0x6c, 0x5c, 0x50, 0x65, 0x65,
0x72, 0x73, 0x74, 0x72, 0x65, 0x61, 0x6d, 0xe2, 0x02, 0x30, 0x48, 0x61, 0x73, 0x68, 0x69, 0x63,
0x6f, 0x72, 0x70, 0x5c, 0x43, 0x6f, 0x6e, 0x73, 0x75, 0x6c, 0x5c, 0x49, 0x6e, 0x74, 0x65, 0x72,
0x6e, 0x61, 0x6c, 0x5c, 0x50, 0x65, 0x65, 0x72, 0x73, 0x74, 0x72, 0x65, 0x61, 0x6d, 0x5c, 0x47,
0x50, 0x42, 0x4d, 0x65, 0x74, 0x61, 0x64, 0x61, 0x74, 0x61, 0xea, 0x02, 0x27, 0x48, 0x61, 0x73,
0x68, 0x69, 0x63, 0x6f, 0x72, 0x70, 0x3a, 0x3a, 0x43, 0x6f, 0x6e, 0x73, 0x75, 0x6c, 0x3a, 0x3a,
0x49, 0x6e, 0x74, 0x65, 0x72, 0x6e, 0x61, 0x6c, 0x3a, 0x3a, 0x50, 0x65, 0x65, 0x72, 0x73, 0x74,
0x72, 0x65, 0x61, 0x6d, 0x62, 0x06, 0x70, 0x72, 0x6f, 0x74, 0x6f, 0x33,
}
var (
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_rawDescOnce sync.Once
file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_rawDescData = file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_rawDesc
)
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
func file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_rawDescGZIP() []byte {
file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_rawDescOnce.Do(func() {
file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_rawDescData = protoimpl.X.CompressGZIP(file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_rawDescData)
})
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
return file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_rawDescData
}
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
var file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_enumTypes = make([]protoimpl.EnumInfo, 1)
var file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_msgTypes = make([]protoimpl.MessageInfo, 11)
var file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_goTypes = []interface{}{
(Operation)(0), // 0: hashicorp.consul.internal.peerstream.Operation
(*ReplicationMessage)(nil), // 1: hashicorp.consul.internal.peerstream.ReplicationMessage
(*LeaderAddress)(nil), // 2: hashicorp.consul.internal.peerstream.LeaderAddress
(*ExportedService)(nil), // 3: hashicorp.consul.internal.peerstream.ExportedService
(*ExportedServiceList)(nil), // 4: hashicorp.consul.internal.peerstream.ExportedServiceList
(*ExchangeSecretRequest)(nil), // 5: hashicorp.consul.internal.peerstream.ExchangeSecretRequest
(*ExchangeSecretResponse)(nil), // 6: hashicorp.consul.internal.peerstream.ExchangeSecretResponse
(*ReplicationMessage_Open)(nil), // 7: hashicorp.consul.internal.peerstream.ReplicationMessage.Open
(*ReplicationMessage_Request)(nil), // 8: hashicorp.consul.internal.peerstream.ReplicationMessage.Request
(*ReplicationMessage_Response)(nil), // 9: hashicorp.consul.internal.peerstream.ReplicationMessage.Response
(*ReplicationMessage_Terminated)(nil), // 10: hashicorp.consul.internal.peerstream.ReplicationMessage.Terminated
(*ReplicationMessage_Heartbeat)(nil), // 11: hashicorp.consul.internal.peerstream.ReplicationMessage.Heartbeat
(*pbservice.CheckServiceNode)(nil), // 12: hashicorp.consul.internal.service.CheckServiceNode
(*pbpeering.RemoteInfo)(nil), // 13: hashicorp.consul.internal.peering.RemoteInfo
(*pbstatus.Status)(nil), // 14: hashicorp.consul.internal.status.Status
(*anypb.Any)(nil), // 15: google.protobuf.Any
}
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
var file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_depIdxs = []int32{
7, // 0: hashicorp.consul.internal.peerstream.ReplicationMessage.open:type_name -> hashicorp.consul.internal.peerstream.ReplicationMessage.Open
8, // 1: hashicorp.consul.internal.peerstream.ReplicationMessage.request:type_name -> hashicorp.consul.internal.peerstream.ReplicationMessage.Request
9, // 2: hashicorp.consul.internal.peerstream.ReplicationMessage.response:type_name -> hashicorp.consul.internal.peerstream.ReplicationMessage.Response
10, // 3: hashicorp.consul.internal.peerstream.ReplicationMessage.terminated:type_name -> hashicorp.consul.internal.peerstream.ReplicationMessage.Terminated
11, // 4: hashicorp.consul.internal.peerstream.ReplicationMessage.heartbeat:type_name -> hashicorp.consul.internal.peerstream.ReplicationMessage.Heartbeat
12, // 5: hashicorp.consul.internal.peerstream.ExportedService.Nodes:type_name -> hashicorp.consul.internal.service.CheckServiceNode
13, // 6: hashicorp.consul.internal.peerstream.ReplicationMessage.Open.Remote:type_name -> hashicorp.consul.internal.peering.RemoteInfo
14, // 7: hashicorp.consul.internal.peerstream.ReplicationMessage.Request.Error:type_name -> hashicorp.consul.internal.status.Status
15, // 8: hashicorp.consul.internal.peerstream.ReplicationMessage.Response.Resource:type_name -> google.protobuf.Any
0, // 9: hashicorp.consul.internal.peerstream.ReplicationMessage.Response.operation:type_name -> hashicorp.consul.internal.peerstream.Operation
1, // 10: hashicorp.consul.internal.peerstream.PeerStreamService.StreamResources:input_type -> hashicorp.consul.internal.peerstream.ReplicationMessage
5, // 11: hashicorp.consul.internal.peerstream.PeerStreamService.ExchangeSecret:input_type -> hashicorp.consul.internal.peerstream.ExchangeSecretRequest
1, // 12: hashicorp.consul.internal.peerstream.PeerStreamService.StreamResources:output_type -> hashicorp.consul.internal.peerstream.ReplicationMessage
6, // 13: hashicorp.consul.internal.peerstream.PeerStreamService.ExchangeSecret:output_type -> hashicorp.consul.internal.peerstream.ExchangeSecretResponse
12, // [12:14] is the sub-list for method output_type
10, // [10:12] is the sub-list for method input_type
10, // [10:10] is the sub-list for extension type_name
10, // [10:10] is the sub-list for extension extendee
0, // [0:10] is the sub-list for field type_name
}
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
func init() { file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_init() }
func file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_init() {
if File_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto != nil {
return
}
if !protoimpl.UnsafeEnabled {
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_msgTypes[0].Exporter = func(v interface{}, i int) interface{} {
switch v := v.(*ReplicationMessage); i {
case 0:
return &v.state
case 1:
return &v.sizeCache
case 2:
return &v.unknownFields
default:
return nil
}
}
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_msgTypes[1].Exporter = func(v interface{}, i int) interface{} {
switch v := v.(*LeaderAddress); i {
case 0:
return &v.state
case 1:
return &v.sizeCache
case 2:
return &v.unknownFields
default:
return nil
}
}
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_msgTypes[2].Exporter = func(v interface{}, i int) interface{} {
switch v := v.(*ExportedService); i {
case 0:
return &v.state
case 1:
return &v.sizeCache
case 2:
return &v.unknownFields
default:
return nil
}
}
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_msgTypes[3].Exporter = func(v interface{}, i int) interface{} {
switch v := v.(*ExportedServiceList); i {
case 0:
return &v.state
case 1:
return &v.sizeCache
case 2:
return &v.unknownFields
default:
return nil
}
}
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_msgTypes[4].Exporter = func(v interface{}, i int) interface{} {
switch v := v.(*ExchangeSecretRequest); i {
case 0:
return &v.state
case 1:
return &v.sizeCache
case 2:
return &v.unknownFields
default:
return nil
}
}
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_msgTypes[5].Exporter = func(v interface{}, i int) interface{} {
switch v := v.(*ExchangeSecretResponse); i {
case 0:
return &v.state
case 1:
return &v.sizeCache
case 2:
return &v.unknownFields
default:
return nil
}
}
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_msgTypes[6].Exporter = func(v interface{}, i int) interface{} {
switch v := v.(*ReplicationMessage_Open); i {
case 0:
return &v.state
case 1:
return &v.sizeCache
case 2:
return &v.unknownFields
default:
return nil
}
}
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_msgTypes[7].Exporter = func(v interface{}, i int) interface{} {
switch v := v.(*ReplicationMessage_Request); i {
case 0:
return &v.state
case 1:
return &v.sizeCache
case 2:
return &v.unknownFields
default:
return nil
}
}
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_msgTypes[8].Exporter = func(v interface{}, i int) interface{} {
switch v := v.(*ReplicationMessage_Response); i {
case 0:
return &v.state
case 1:
return &v.sizeCache
case 2:
return &v.unknownFields
default:
return nil
}
}
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_msgTypes[9].Exporter = func(v interface{}, i int) interface{} {
switch v := v.(*ReplicationMessage_Terminated); i {
case 0:
return &v.state
case 1:
return &v.sizeCache
case 2:
return &v.unknownFields
default:
return nil
}
}
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_msgTypes[10].Exporter = func(v interface{}, i int) interface{} {
switch v := v.(*ReplicationMessage_Heartbeat); i {
case 0:
return &v.state
case 1:
return &v.sizeCache
case 2:
return &v.unknownFields
default:
return nil
}
}
}
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_msgTypes[0].OneofWrappers = []interface{}{
(*ReplicationMessage_Open_)(nil),
(*ReplicationMessage_Request_)(nil),
(*ReplicationMessage_Response_)(nil),
(*ReplicationMessage_Terminated_)(nil),
(*ReplicationMessage_Heartbeat_)(nil),
}
type x struct{}
out := protoimpl.TypeBuilder{
File: protoimpl.DescBuilder{
GoPackagePath: reflect.TypeOf(x{}).PkgPath(),
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
RawDescriptor: file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_rawDesc,
NumEnums: 1,
NumMessages: 11,
NumExtensions: 0,
NumServices: 1,
},
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
GoTypes: file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_goTypes,
DependencyIndexes: file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_depIdxs,
EnumInfos: file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_enumTypes,
MessageInfos: file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_msgTypes,
}.Build()
Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness (#16302) Protobuf Refactoring for Multi-Module Cleanliness This commit includes the following: Moves all packages that were within proto/ to proto/private Rewrites imports to account for the packages being moved Adds in buf.work.yaml to enable buf workspaces Names the proto-public buf module so that we can override the Go package imports within proto/buf.yaml Bumps the buf version dependency to 1.14.0 (I was trying out the version to see if it would get around an issue - it didn't but it also doesn't break things and it seemed best to keep up with the toolchain changes) Why: In the future we will need to consume other protobuf dependencies such as the Google HTTP annotations for openapi generation or grpc-gateway usage. There were some recent changes to have our own ratelimiting annotations. The two combined were not working when I was trying to use them together (attempting to rebase another branch) Buf workspaces should be the solution to the problem Buf workspaces means that each module will have generated Go code that embeds proto file names relative to the proto dir and not the top level repo root. This resulted in proto file name conflicts in the Go global protobuf type registry. The solution to that was to add in a private/ directory into the path within the proto/ directory. That then required rewriting all the imports. Is this safe? AFAICT yes The gRPC wire protocol doesn't seem to care about the proto file names (although the Go grpc code does tack on the proto file name as Metadata in the ServiceDesc) Other than imports, there were no changes to any generated code as a result of this.
2 years ago
File_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto = out.File
file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_rawDesc = nil
file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_goTypes = nil
file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_depIdxs = nil
}