ci: introduce proto breakage detector (#2671) #2684
Conversation
Co-authored-by: Rootul P <[email protected]>
Makefile
Outdated
| ## proto-check-breaking: Check if there are any breaking change to protobuf definitions. | ||
| proto-check-breaking: | ||
| @echo "--> Checking if Protobuf definitions have any breaking changes" | ||
| @$(DOCKER_BUF) breaking --against $(HTTPS_GIT)#branch=v1.x |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Doesn't it make more sense to test against the target branch instead of always main?
Also, why https://github.com/celestiaorg/celestia-app.git references #branch=v1.x as specified in the comment?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ah good point. I just directly ported over the commit although theoretically this is also accurate as we should never break from v1 onwards
There was a problem hiding this comment.
[discussion] I had the same question as Rachid but assumed that main intentionally wants to preserve Protobuf compatability with v1.x
Do we want to check for Protobuf breaking changes against main and v1.x? If we can't do this with one command maybe:
@$(DOCKER_BUF) breaking --against $(HTTPS_GIT)#branch=v1.x
@$(DOCKER_BUF) breaking --against $(HTTPS_GIT)#branch=mainThere was a problem hiding this comment.
So long as we haven't already broken protos there shouldn't be any difference between checking it against v1.x and main so we needn't do both.
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #2684 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 21.11% 19.89% -1.22%
==========================================
Files 138 139 +1
Lines 15767 16695 +928
==========================================
- Hits 3329 3322 -7
- Misses 12115 13051 +936
+ Partials 323 322 -1 |
This ports over #2671 to `main