-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 195
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
.*: add verify script for go directive changes #267
Merged
k8s-ci-robot
merged 1 commit into
kubernetes:master
from
MadhavJivrajani:add-go-directive-verify
Apr 4, 2024
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -0,0 +1,57 @@ | ||
#!/usr/bin/env bash | ||
|
||
# Copyright 2024 The Kubernetes Authors. | ||
# | ||
# Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License"); | ||
# you may not use this file except in compliance with the License. | ||
# You may obtain a copy of the License at | ||
# | ||
# http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0 | ||
# | ||
# Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software | ||
# distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS, | ||
# WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied. | ||
# See the License for the specific language governing permissions and | ||
# limitations under the License. | ||
|
||
set -o errexit | ||
set -o nounset | ||
set -o pipefail | ||
|
||
function usage { | ||
local script="$(basename $0)" | ||
|
||
echo >&2 "Usage: ${script} <maximum go directive> | ||
This script should be run at the root of a module. | ||
|
||
Compare the go directive in the local working copy's go.mod | ||
to the specified maximum version it can be. Versions provided | ||
here are of the form 1.x.y, without the 'go' prefix. | ||
Examples: | ||
${script} 1.20 | ||
${script} 1.21.6 | ||
" | ||
exit 1 | ||
} | ||
|
||
max="$1" | ||
# If max is empty, print usage and error | ||
if [[ -z "${max}" ]]; then | ||
usage; | ||
fi | ||
|
||
# Don't specify the version with the go prefix, just 1.x.y will do. | ||
if [[ ! "${max}" =~ ^[0-9]\.[0-9]+(\.[0-9]+)?$ ]]; then | ||
usage | ||
fi | ||
|
||
current=$(awk '/^go / {print $2;}' go.mod) | ||
if [[ -z "${current}" ]]; then | ||
echo >&2 "FAIL: could not get value of go directive from go.mod" | ||
exit 1 | ||
fi | ||
|
||
if ! printf '%s\n' "${current}" "${max}" | sort --check=silent --version-sort; then | ||
echo >&2 "FAIL: current Go directive ${current} is greater than ${max}" | ||
exit 1 | ||
fi |
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Why not test for exact equal? We don't want it to go backwards either, right?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Trying to understand this a little better, would this serve as a sanity check in general? Because when we bump deps, the
go
directive is either going to stay the same or its going to increase, I don't think it can go backwards iiuc.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
What I meant is that this is obvious:
If I understand this code, you would allow "max" to be 1.20.1 and "current" to be 1.20 - why would we do that? I feel like it's too clever -- don't we ALWAYS want an exact match?
The goal here is that the verify script is not going to be changed "accidentally" (by tooling), so it's an effective (but simple) cross-check.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I understand now, thanks for laying it out @thockin!
Edit: @thockin, the go directive in the
go.mod
here is 1.13, do we want to bump that because only then will this workThere was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Uggh, after making my point, you clever showed me I was being an idiot. This is not "locking" the version, it really is upper-bounding it. As soon as we add support for type-params, 1.13 will have to bump up, I guess?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yeah, "upper-bounding" is a nice way to put it. Thanks! <3
Yeah, that sounds about right!