Question: Could we have a v1? about udpa HOT 14 CLOSED

When cncf/xds#5 merges, cncf/xds will be live, we can then validate against Envoy repo and cut the release.

from udpa.

FYI: @dfawley @menghanl

from udpa.

Is there any update on this?
Thanks.

from udpa.

+1 on this, also depending on the old path, can we get a tag so we can pin to the old version?

from udpa.

@htuch - this is important for gRPC to be able to declare it has "stable" xDS support. We can't have our builds breaking because something here is moved or deleted.

from udpa.

We should consider whether we can migrate these protos from cncf/udpa to cncf/xds before tagging a v1.

from udpa.

Deleting the generated Go code from this repo would break "stable" releases of gRPC-Go. We really should have raised this as an urgent, blocking issue before our first release with xDS support, but nobody noticed it at the time. In fact, it was a cleanup CL that moved us from using our own generated pb.gos (also a Really Bad Idea because of the global protobuf registry) to relying upon this repo (grpc/grpc-go#3449). And we are proposing to use it more in https://github.com/markdroth/proposal/blob/xds_http_filters/A39-xds-http-filters.md#xds-api-fields.

from udpa.

Actually, it's even more important for us to have a stable release of https://github.com/envoyproxy/go-control-plane, since we use protos from there extensively, vs. only one from here (ORCA).

from udpa.

Got it. @dfawley can you explain what the migration path we could do to cncf/xds that doesn't break gRPC Go is? I want to do this migration soon (maybe sooner if it helps this issue).

from udpa.

We should be able to migrate envoyproxy/envoy and envoyproxy/go-control-plane to reference cncf/xds instead of this repo at any time. Doing this ASAP would be great. Then we'd have to work out how/when to delete this repo.

Once this repo is no longer needed, we could do patch releases for the previous 3 minor releases of grpc-go to reference the latest envoyproxy/go-control-plane release and cncf/xds (hopefully both at a v1!). We should still leave this repo here for at least 6-12 months after that, to provide a reasonable amount of time for users to update. Technically someone could be broken no matter how long we wait, but we have to move forward at some point.

from udpa.

SG, I'll do the migration in the next day or two. At the same time, we will do the master to main in both places.

from udpa.

@htuch are there any updates on this effort?

from udpa.

@dfawley I've started the cncf/xds migration. I'll try get some progress happening by early next week to get us to the right point here.

from udpa.

@dfawley let's move discussion to cncf/xds#2.

from udpa.