Skip to content

Conversation

@abderrahim
Copy link
Contributor

This makes it compatible with protobuf 30+, a.k.a. 6, a.k.a. 6.30+

@abderrahim abderrahim force-pushed the abderrahim/protobuf-6 branch 2 times, most recently from d6a527d to f713243 Compare June 20, 2025 20:33
@abderrahim abderrahim force-pushed the abderrahim/protobuf-6 branch 2 times, most recently from a7d2f21 to 0a58032 Compare June 24, 2025 09:57
abderrahim and others added 2 commits June 28, 2025 10:24
It's monkey patching something that is no longer used by buildstream
This makes it compatible with protobuf 30+, a.k.a. 6, a.k.a. 6.30+
@juergbi
Copy link
Contributor

juergbi commented Aug 15, 2025

According to https://protobuf.dev/support/cross-version-runtime-guarantee/:

As of 6.32.0, all generated code since 3.20.0 will be supported until at least 8.x.y.

I.e., there should be long forward compatibility of generated Python code. Assuming this is correct, we should not upgrade grpcio-tools for code generation. We should instead loosen the protobuf requirement to allow use with protobuf 6 and later.

Runtime warnings have been reported, though, in #2042. We should investigate the reason for these warnings before taking any action.

@juergbi
Copy link
Contributor

juergbi commented Aug 15, 2025

The protobuf warning has been removed upstream: protocolbuffers/protobuf@1af7fd4

@juergbi
Copy link
Contributor

juergbi commented Aug 15, 2025

Based on the above, I've opened #2043 as alternative to this PR.

@juergbi
Copy link
Contributor

juergbi commented Aug 17, 2025

Closing this as #2043 has been merged instead.

@juergbi juergbi closed this Aug 17, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants