consul

Tree: 4845816c60

Commit Graph

Author	SHA1	Message	Date
Matt Keeler	085c0addc0	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
R.B. Boyer	f507f62f3c	peering: initial sync (#12842 ) - Add endpoints related to peering: read, list, generate token, initiate peering - Update node/service/check table indexing to account for peers - Foundational changes for pushing service updates to a peer - Plumb peer name through Health.ServiceNodes path see: ENT-1765, ENT-1280, ENT-1283, ENT-1283, ENT-1756, ENT-1739, ENT-1750, ENT-1679, ENT-1709, ENT-1704, ENT-1690, ENT-1689, ENT-1702, ENT-1701, ENT-1683, ENT-1663, ENT-1650, ENT-1678, ENT-1628, ENT-1658, ENT-1640, ENT-1637, ENT-1597, ENT-1634, ENT-1613, ENT-1616, ENT-1617, ENT-1591, ENT-1588, ENT-1596, ENT-1572, ENT-1555 Co-authored-by: R.B. Boyer <rb@hashicorp.com> Co-authored-by: freddygv <freddy@hashicorp.com> Co-authored-by: Chris S. Kim <ckim@hashicorp.com> Co-authored-by: Evan Culver <eculver@hashicorp.com> Co-authored-by: Nitya Dhanushkodi <nitya@hashicorp.com>	3 years ago

Author

SHA1

Message

Date

Matt Keeler

085c0addc0

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

R.B. Boyer

f507f62f3c

peering: initial sync (#12842 )

- Add endpoints related to peering: read, list, generate token, initiate peering
- Update node/service/check table indexing to account for peers
- Foundational changes for pushing service updates to a peer
- Plumb peer name through Health.ServiceNodes path

see: ENT-1765, ENT-1280, ENT-1283, ENT-1283, ENT-1756, ENT-1739, ENT-1750, ENT-1679,
     ENT-1709, ENT-1704, ENT-1690, ENT-1689, ENT-1702, ENT-1701, ENT-1683, ENT-1663,
     ENT-1650, ENT-1678, ENT-1628, ENT-1658, ENT-1640, ENT-1637, ENT-1597, ENT-1634,
     ENT-1613, ENT-1616, ENT-1617, ENT-1591, ENT-1588, ENT-1596, ENT-1572, ENT-1555

Co-authored-by: R.B. Boyer <rb@hashicorp.com>
Co-authored-by: freddygv <freddy@hashicorp.com>
Co-authored-by: Chris S. Kim <ckim@hashicorp.com>
Co-authored-by: Evan Culver <eculver@hashicorp.com>
Co-authored-by: Nitya Dhanushkodi <nitya@hashicorp.com>

3 years ago

2 Commits (4845816c602a883074537330ccdcebf99531cf96)