consul/proto/private/pbpeerstream/peerstream.pb.go

1143 lines
46 KiB
Go
Raw Normal View History

// Copyright (c) HashiCorp, Inc.
// SPDX-License-Identifier: MPL-2.0
// Code generated by protoc-gen-go. DO NOT EDIT.
// versions:
// protoc-gen-go v1.30.0
// protoc (unknown)
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.
2023-02-17 21:14:46 +00:00
// source: private/pbpeerstream/peerstream.proto
package pbpeerstream
import (
2023-01-04 16:07:02 +00:00
_ "github.com/hashicorp/consul/proto-public/annotations/ratelimit"
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.
2023-02-17 21:14:46 +00:00
pbpeering "github.com/hashicorp/consul/proto/private/pbpeering"
pbservice "github.com/hashicorp/consul/proto/private/pbservice"
pbstatus "github.com/hashicorp/consul/proto/private/pbstatus"
protoreflect "google.golang.org/protobuf/reflect/protoreflect"
protoimpl "google.golang.org/protobuf/runtime/protoimpl"
anypb "google.golang.org/protobuf/types/known/anypb"
reflect "reflect"
sync "sync"
)
const (
// Verify that this generated code is sufficiently up-to-date.
_ = protoimpl.EnforceVersion(20 - protoimpl.MinVersion)
// Verify that runtime/protoimpl is sufficiently up-to-date.
_ = protoimpl.EnforceVersion(protoimpl.MaxVersion - 20)
)
// Operation enumerates supported operations for replicated resources.
type Operation int32
const (
Operation_OPERATION_UNSPECIFIED Operation = 0
// UPSERT represents a create or update event.
Operation_OPERATION_UPSERT Operation = 1
)
// Enum value maps for Operation.
var (
Operation_name = map[int32]string{
0: "OPERATION_UNSPECIFIED",
1: "OPERATION_UPSERT",
}
Operation_value = map[string]int32{
"OPERATION_UNSPECIFIED": 0,
"OPERATION_UPSERT": 1,
}
)
func (x Operation) Enum() *Operation {
p := new(Operation)
*p = x
return p
}
func (x Operation) String() string {
return protoimpl.X.EnumStringOf(x.Descriptor(), protoreflect.EnumNumber(x))
}
func (Operation) Descriptor() protoreflect.EnumDescriptor {
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.
2023-02-17 21:14:46 +00:00
return file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_enumTypes[0].Descriptor()
}
func (Operation) Type() protoreflect.EnumType {
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.
2023-02-17 21:14:46 +00:00
return &file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_enumTypes[0]
}
func (x Operation) Number() protoreflect.EnumNumber {
return protoreflect.EnumNumber(x)
}
// Deprecated: Use Operation.Descriptor instead.
func (Operation) EnumDescriptor() ([]byte, []int) {
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.
2023-02-17 21:14:46 +00:00
return file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_rawDescGZIP(), []int{0}
}
type ReplicationMessage struct {
state protoimpl.MessageState
sizeCache protoimpl.SizeCache
unknownFields protoimpl.UnknownFields
// Types that are assignable to Payload:
//
// *ReplicationMessage_Open_
// *ReplicationMessage_Request_
// *ReplicationMessage_Response_
// *ReplicationMessage_Terminated_
// *ReplicationMessage_Heartbeat_
Payload isReplicationMessage_Payload `protobuf_oneof:"Payload"`
}
func (x *ReplicationMessage) Reset() {
*x = ReplicationMessage{}
if protoimpl.UnsafeEnabled {
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.
2023-02-17 21:14:46 +00:00
mi := &file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_msgTypes[0]
ms := protoimpl.X.MessageStateOf(protoimpl.Pointer(x))
ms.StoreMessageInfo(mi)
}
}
func (x *ReplicationMessage) String() string {
return protoimpl.X.MessageStringOf(x)
}
func (*ReplicationMessage) ProtoMessage() {}
func (x *ReplicationMessage) ProtoReflect() protoreflect.Message {
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.
2023-02-17 21:14:46 +00:00
mi := &file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_msgTypes[0]
if protoimpl.UnsafeEnabled && x != nil {
ms := protoimpl.X.MessageStateOf(protoimpl.Pointer(x))
if ms.LoadMessageInfo() == nil {
ms.StoreMessageInfo(mi)
}
return ms
}
return mi.MessageOf(x)
}
// Deprecated: Use ReplicationMessage.ProtoReflect.Descriptor instead.
func (*ReplicationMessage) Descriptor() ([]byte, []int) {
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.
2023-02-17 21:14:46 +00:00
return file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_rawDescGZIP(), []int{0}
}
func (m *ReplicationMessage) GetPayload() isReplicationMessage_Payload {
if m != nil {
return m.Payload
}
return nil
}
func (x *ReplicationMessage) GetOpen() *ReplicationMessage_Open {
if x, ok := x.GetPayload().(*ReplicationMessage_Open_); ok {
return x.Open
}
return nil
}
func (x *ReplicationMessage) GetRequest() *ReplicationMessage_Request {
if x, ok := x.GetPayload().(*ReplicationMessage_Request_); ok {
return x.Request
}
return nil
}
func (x *ReplicationMessage) GetResponse() *ReplicationMessage_Response {
if x, ok := x.GetPayload().(*ReplicationMessage_Response_); ok {
return x.Response
}
return nil
}
func (x *ReplicationMessage) GetTerminated() *ReplicationMessage_Terminated {
if x, ok := x.GetPayload().(*ReplicationMessage_Terminated_); ok {
return x.Terminated
}
return nil
}
func (x *ReplicationMessage) GetHeartbeat() *ReplicationMessage_Heartbeat {
if x, ok := x.GetPayload().(*ReplicationMessage_Heartbeat_); ok {
return x.Heartbeat
}
return nil
}
type isReplicationMessage_Payload interface {
isReplicationMessage_Payload()
}
type ReplicationMessage_Open_ struct {
Open *ReplicationMessage_Open `protobuf:"bytes,1,opt,name=open,proto3,oneof"`
}
type ReplicationMessage_Request_ struct {
Request *ReplicationMessage_Request `protobuf:"bytes,2,opt,name=request,proto3,oneof"`
}
type ReplicationMessage_Response_ struct {
Response *ReplicationMessage_Response `protobuf:"bytes,3,opt,name=response,proto3,oneof"`
}
type ReplicationMessage_Terminated_ struct {
Terminated *ReplicationMessage_Terminated `protobuf:"bytes,4,opt,name=terminated,proto3,oneof"`
}
type ReplicationMessage_Heartbeat_ struct {
Heartbeat *ReplicationMessage_Heartbeat `protobuf:"bytes,5,opt,name=heartbeat,proto3,oneof"`
}
func (*ReplicationMessage_Open_) isReplicationMessage_Payload() {}
func (*ReplicationMessage_Request_) isReplicationMessage_Payload() {}
func (*ReplicationMessage_Response_) isReplicationMessage_Payload() {}
func (*ReplicationMessage_Terminated_) isReplicationMessage_Payload() {}
func (*ReplicationMessage_Heartbeat_) isReplicationMessage_Payload() {}
// LeaderAddress is sent when the peering service runs on a consul node
// that is not a leader. The node either lost leadership, or never was a leader.
type LeaderAddress struct {
state protoimpl.MessageState
sizeCache protoimpl.SizeCache
unknownFields protoimpl.UnknownFields
// address is an ip:port best effort hint at what could be the cluster leader's address
Address string `protobuf:"bytes,1,opt,name=address,proto3" json:"address,omitempty"`
}
func (x *LeaderAddress) Reset() {
*x = LeaderAddress{}
if protoimpl.UnsafeEnabled {
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.
2023-02-17 21:14:46 +00:00
mi := &file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_msgTypes[1]
ms := protoimpl.X.MessageStateOf(protoimpl.Pointer(x))
ms.StoreMessageInfo(mi)
}
}
func (x *LeaderAddress) String() string {
return protoimpl.X.MessageStringOf(x)
}
func (*LeaderAddress) ProtoMessage() {}
func (x *LeaderAddress) ProtoReflect() protoreflect.Message {
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.
2023-02-17 21:14:46 +00:00
mi := &file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_msgTypes[1]
if protoimpl.UnsafeEnabled && x != nil {
ms := protoimpl.X.MessageStateOf(protoimpl.Pointer(x))
if ms.LoadMessageInfo() == nil {
ms.StoreMessageInfo(mi)
}
return ms
}
return mi.MessageOf(x)
}
// Deprecated: Use LeaderAddress.ProtoReflect.Descriptor instead.
func (*LeaderAddress) Descriptor() ([]byte, []int) {
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.
2023-02-17 21:14:46 +00:00
return file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_rawDescGZIP(), []int{1}
}
func (x *LeaderAddress) GetAddress() string {
if x != nil {
return x.Address
}
return ""
}
// ExportedService is one of the types of data returned via peer stream replication.
type ExportedService struct {
state protoimpl.MessageState
sizeCache protoimpl.SizeCache
unknownFields protoimpl.UnknownFields
Nodes []*pbservice.CheckServiceNode `protobuf:"bytes,1,rep,name=Nodes,proto3" json:"Nodes,omitempty"`
}
func (x *ExportedService) Reset() {
*x = ExportedService{}
if protoimpl.UnsafeEnabled {
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.
2023-02-17 21:14:46 +00:00
mi := &file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_msgTypes[2]
ms := protoimpl.X.MessageStateOf(protoimpl.Pointer(x))
ms.StoreMessageInfo(mi)
}
}
func (x *ExportedService) String() string {
return protoimpl.X.MessageStringOf(x)
}
func (*ExportedService) ProtoMessage() {}
func (x *ExportedService) ProtoReflect() protoreflect.Message {
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.
2023-02-17 21:14:46 +00:00
mi := &file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_msgTypes[2]
if protoimpl.UnsafeEnabled && x != nil {
ms := protoimpl.X.MessageStateOf(protoimpl.Pointer(x))
if ms.LoadMessageInfo() == nil {
ms.StoreMessageInfo(mi)
}
return ms
}
return mi.MessageOf(x)
}
// Deprecated: Use ExportedService.ProtoReflect.Descriptor instead.
func (*ExportedService) Descriptor() ([]byte, []int) {
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.
2023-02-17 21:14:46 +00:00
return file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_rawDescGZIP(), []int{2}
}
func (x *ExportedService) GetNodes() []*pbservice.CheckServiceNode {
if x != nil {
return x.Nodes
}
return nil
}
// ExportedServiceList is one of the types of data returned via peer stream replication.
type ExportedServiceList struct {
state protoimpl.MessageState
sizeCache protoimpl.SizeCache
unknownFields protoimpl.UnknownFields
// The identifiers for the services being exported.
Services []string `protobuf:"bytes,1,rep,name=Services,proto3" json:"Services,omitempty"`
}
func (x *ExportedServiceList) Reset() {
*x = ExportedServiceList{}
if protoimpl.UnsafeEnabled {
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.
2023-02-17 21:14:46 +00:00
mi := &file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_msgTypes[3]
ms := protoimpl.X.MessageStateOf(protoimpl.Pointer(x))
ms.StoreMessageInfo(mi)
}
}
func (x *ExportedServiceList) String() string {
return protoimpl.X.MessageStringOf(x)
}
func (*ExportedServiceList) ProtoMessage() {}
func (x *ExportedServiceList) ProtoReflect() protoreflect.Message {
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.
2023-02-17 21:14:46 +00:00
mi := &file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_msgTypes[3]
if protoimpl.UnsafeEnabled && x != nil {
ms := protoimpl.X.MessageStateOf(protoimpl.Pointer(x))
if ms.LoadMessageInfo() == nil {
ms.StoreMessageInfo(mi)
}
return ms
}
return mi.MessageOf(x)
}
// Deprecated: Use ExportedServiceList.ProtoReflect.Descriptor instead.
func (*ExportedServiceList) Descriptor() ([]byte, []int) {
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.
2023-02-17 21:14:46 +00:00
return file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_rawDescGZIP(), []int{3}
}
func (x *ExportedServiceList) GetServices() []string {
if x != nil {
return x.Services
}
return nil
}
type ExchangeSecretRequest struct {
state protoimpl.MessageState
sizeCache protoimpl.SizeCache
unknownFields protoimpl.UnknownFields
// PeerID is the ID of the peering, as determined by the cluster that generated the
// peering token.
PeerID string `protobuf:"bytes,1,opt,name=PeerID,proto3" json:"PeerID,omitempty"`
// EstablishmentSecret is the one-time-use secret encoded in the received peering token.
EstablishmentSecret string `protobuf:"bytes,2,opt,name=EstablishmentSecret,proto3" json:"EstablishmentSecret,omitempty"`
}
func (x *ExchangeSecretRequest) Reset() {
*x = ExchangeSecretRequest{}
if protoimpl.UnsafeEnabled {
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.
2023-02-17 21:14:46 +00:00
mi := &file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_msgTypes[4]
ms := protoimpl.X.MessageStateOf(protoimpl.Pointer(x))
ms.StoreMessageInfo(mi)
}
}
func (x *ExchangeSecretRequest) String() string {
return protoimpl.X.MessageStringOf(x)
}
func (*ExchangeSecretRequest) ProtoMessage() {}
func (x *ExchangeSecretRequest) ProtoReflect() protoreflect.Message {
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.
2023-02-17 21:14:46 +00:00
mi := &file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_msgTypes[4]
if protoimpl.UnsafeEnabled && x != nil {
ms := protoimpl.X.MessageStateOf(protoimpl.Pointer(x))
if ms.LoadMessageInfo() == nil {
ms.StoreMessageInfo(mi)
}
return ms
}
return mi.MessageOf(x)
}
// Deprecated: Use ExchangeSecretRequest.ProtoReflect.Descriptor instead.
func (*ExchangeSecretRequest) Descriptor() ([]byte, []int) {
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.
2023-02-17 21:14:46 +00:00
return file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_rawDescGZIP(), []int{4}
}
func (x *ExchangeSecretRequest) GetPeerID() string {
if x != nil {
return x.PeerID
}
return ""
}
func (x *ExchangeSecretRequest) GetEstablishmentSecret() string {
if x != nil {
return x.EstablishmentSecret
}
return ""
}
type ExchangeSecretResponse struct {
state protoimpl.MessageState
sizeCache protoimpl.SizeCache
unknownFields protoimpl.UnknownFields
// StreamSecret is the long-lived secret to be used for authentication with the
// peering stream handler.
StreamSecret string `protobuf:"bytes,1,opt,name=StreamSecret,proto3" json:"StreamSecret,omitempty"`
}
func (x *ExchangeSecretResponse) Reset() {
*x = ExchangeSecretResponse{}
if protoimpl.UnsafeEnabled {
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.
2023-02-17 21:14:46 +00:00
mi := &file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_msgTypes[5]
ms := protoimpl.X.MessageStateOf(protoimpl.Pointer(x))
ms.StoreMessageInfo(mi)
}
}
func (x *ExchangeSecretResponse) String() string {
return protoimpl.X.MessageStringOf(x)
}
func (*ExchangeSecretResponse) ProtoMessage() {}
func (x *ExchangeSecretResponse) ProtoReflect() protoreflect.Message {
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.
2023-02-17 21:14:46 +00:00
mi := &file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_msgTypes[5]
if protoimpl.UnsafeEnabled && x != nil {
ms := protoimpl.X.MessageStateOf(protoimpl.Pointer(x))
if ms.LoadMessageInfo() == nil {
ms.StoreMessageInfo(mi)
}
return ms
}
return mi.MessageOf(x)
}
// Deprecated: Use ExchangeSecretResponse.ProtoReflect.Descriptor instead.
func (*ExchangeSecretResponse) Descriptor() ([]byte, []int) {
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.
2023-02-17 21:14:46 +00:00
return file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_rawDescGZIP(), []int{5}
}
func (x *ExchangeSecretResponse) GetStreamSecret() string {
if x != nil {
return x.StreamSecret
}
return ""
}
// Open is the initial message send by a dialing peer to establish the peering stream.
type ReplicationMessage_Open struct {
state protoimpl.MessageState
sizeCache protoimpl.SizeCache
unknownFields protoimpl.UnknownFields
// An identifier for the peer making the request.
// This identifier is provisioned by the serving peer prior to the request from the dialing peer.
PeerID string `protobuf:"bytes,1,opt,name=PeerID,proto3" json:"PeerID,omitempty"`
// StreamSecretID contains the long-lived secret from stream authn/authz.
StreamSecretID string `protobuf:"bytes,2,opt,name=StreamSecretID,proto3" json:"StreamSecretID,omitempty"`
// Remote contains metadata about the remote peer.
Remote *pbpeering.RemoteInfo `protobuf:"bytes,3,opt,name=Remote,proto3" json:"Remote,omitempty"`
}
func (x *ReplicationMessage_Open) Reset() {
*x = ReplicationMessage_Open{}
if protoimpl.UnsafeEnabled {
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.
2023-02-17 21:14:46 +00:00
mi := &file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_msgTypes[6]
ms := protoimpl.X.MessageStateOf(protoimpl.Pointer(x))
ms.StoreMessageInfo(mi)
}
}
func (x *ReplicationMessage_Open) String() string {
return protoimpl.X.MessageStringOf(x)
}
func (*ReplicationMessage_Open) ProtoMessage() {}
func (x *ReplicationMessage_Open) ProtoReflect() protoreflect.Message {
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.
2023-02-17 21:14:46 +00:00
mi := &file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_msgTypes[6]
if protoimpl.UnsafeEnabled && x != nil {
ms := protoimpl.X.MessageStateOf(protoimpl.Pointer(x))
if ms.LoadMessageInfo() == nil {
ms.StoreMessageInfo(mi)
}
return ms
}
return mi.MessageOf(x)
}
// Deprecated: Use ReplicationMessage_Open.ProtoReflect.Descriptor instead.
func (*ReplicationMessage_Open) Descriptor() ([]byte, []int) {
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.
2023-02-17 21:14:46 +00:00
return file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_rawDescGZIP(), []int{0, 0}
}
func (x *ReplicationMessage_Open) GetPeerID() string {
if x != nil {
return x.PeerID
}
return ""
}
func (x *ReplicationMessage_Open) GetStreamSecretID() string {
if x != nil {
return x.StreamSecretID
}
return ""
}
func (x *ReplicationMessage_Open) GetRemote() *pbpeering.RemoteInfo {
if x != nil {
return x.Remote
}
return nil
}
// A Request requests to subscribe to a resource of a given type.
type ReplicationMessage_Request struct {
state protoimpl.MessageState
sizeCache protoimpl.SizeCache
unknownFields protoimpl.UnknownFields
// An identifier for the peer making the request.
// This identifier is provisioned by the serving peer prior to the request from the dialing peer.
PeerID string `protobuf:"bytes,1,opt,name=PeerID,proto3" json:"PeerID,omitempty"`
// ResponseNonce corresponding to that of the response being ACKed or NACKed.
// Initial subscription requests will have an empty nonce.
// The nonce is generated and incremented by the exporting peer.
// TODO
ResponseNonce string `protobuf:"bytes,2,opt,name=ResponseNonce,proto3" json:"ResponseNonce,omitempty"`
// The type URL for the resource being requested or ACK/NACKed.
ResourceURL string `protobuf:"bytes,3,opt,name=ResourceURL,proto3" json:"ResourceURL,omitempty"`
// The error if the previous response was not applied successfully.
// This field is empty in the first subscription request.
Error *pbstatus.Status `protobuf:"bytes,5,opt,name=Error,proto3" json:"Error,omitempty"`
}
func (x *ReplicationMessage_Request) Reset() {
*x = ReplicationMessage_Request{}
if protoimpl.UnsafeEnabled {
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.
2023-02-17 21:14:46 +00:00
mi := &file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_msgTypes[7]
ms := protoimpl.X.MessageStateOf(protoimpl.Pointer(x))
ms.StoreMessageInfo(mi)
}
}
func (x *ReplicationMessage_Request) String() string {
return protoimpl.X.MessageStringOf(x)
}
func (*ReplicationMessage_Request) ProtoMessage() {}
func (x *ReplicationMessage_Request) ProtoReflect() protoreflect.Message {
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.
2023-02-17 21:14:46 +00:00
mi := &file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_msgTypes[7]
if protoimpl.UnsafeEnabled && x != nil {
ms := protoimpl.X.MessageStateOf(protoimpl.Pointer(x))
if ms.LoadMessageInfo() == nil {
ms.StoreMessageInfo(mi)
}
return ms
}
return mi.MessageOf(x)
}
// Deprecated: Use ReplicationMessage_Request.ProtoReflect.Descriptor instead.
func (*ReplicationMessage_Request) Descriptor() ([]byte, []int) {
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.
2023-02-17 21:14:46 +00:00
return file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_rawDescGZIP(), []int{0, 1}
}
func (x *ReplicationMessage_Request) GetPeerID() string {
if x != nil {
return x.PeerID
}
return ""
}
func (x *ReplicationMessage_Request) GetResponseNonce() string {
if x != nil {
return x.ResponseNonce
}
return ""
}
func (x *ReplicationMessage_Request) GetResourceURL() string {
if x != nil {
return x.ResourceURL
}
return ""
}
func (x *ReplicationMessage_Request) GetError() *pbstatus.Status {
if x != nil {
return x.Error
}
return nil
}
// A Response contains resources corresponding to a subscription request.
type ReplicationMessage_Response struct {
state protoimpl.MessageState
sizeCache protoimpl.SizeCache
unknownFields protoimpl.UnknownFields
// Nonce identifying a response in a stream.
Nonce string `protobuf:"bytes,1,opt,name=Nonce,proto3" json:"Nonce,omitempty"`
// The type URL of resource being returned.
ResourceURL string `protobuf:"bytes,2,opt,name=ResourceURL,proto3" json:"ResourceURL,omitempty"`
// An identifier for the resource being returned.
// This could be the SPIFFE ID of the service.
ResourceID string `protobuf:"bytes,3,opt,name=ResourceID,proto3" json:"ResourceID,omitempty"`
// The resource being returned.
Resource *anypb.Any `protobuf:"bytes,4,opt,name=Resource,proto3" json:"Resource,omitempty"`
// REQUIRED. The operation to be performed in relation to the resource.
Operation Operation `protobuf:"varint,5,opt,name=operation,proto3,enum=hashicorp.consul.internal.peerstream.Operation" json:"operation,omitempty"`
}
func (x *ReplicationMessage_Response) Reset() {
*x = ReplicationMessage_Response{}
if protoimpl.UnsafeEnabled {
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.
2023-02-17 21:14:46 +00:00
mi := &file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_msgTypes[8]
ms := protoimpl.X.MessageStateOf(protoimpl.Pointer(x))
ms.StoreMessageInfo(mi)
}
}
func (x *ReplicationMessage_Response) String() string {
return protoimpl.X.MessageStringOf(x)
}
func (*ReplicationMessage_Response) ProtoMessage() {}
func (x *ReplicationMessage_Response) ProtoReflect() protoreflect.Message {
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.
2023-02-17 21:14:46 +00:00
mi := &file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_msgTypes[8]
if protoimpl.UnsafeEnabled && x != nil {
ms := protoimpl.X.MessageStateOf(protoimpl.Pointer(x))
if ms.LoadMessageInfo() == nil {
ms.StoreMessageInfo(mi)
}
return ms
}
return mi.MessageOf(x)
}
// Deprecated: Use ReplicationMessage_Response.ProtoReflect.Descriptor instead.
func (*ReplicationMessage_Response) Descriptor() ([]byte, []int) {
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.
2023-02-17 21:14:46 +00:00
return file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_rawDescGZIP(), []int{0, 2}
}
func (x *ReplicationMessage_Response) GetNonce() string {
if x != nil {
return x.Nonce
}
return ""
}
func (x *ReplicationMessage_Response) GetResourceURL() string {
if x != nil {
return x.ResourceURL
}
return ""
}
func (x *ReplicationMessage_Response) GetResourceID() string {
if x != nil {
return x.ResourceID
}
return ""
}
func (x *ReplicationMessage_Response) GetResource() *anypb.Any {
if x != nil {
return x.Resource
}
return nil
}
func (x *ReplicationMessage_Response) GetOperation() Operation {
if x != nil {
return x.Operation
}
return Operation_OPERATION_UNSPECIFIED
}
// Terminated is sent when a peering is deleted locally.
// This message signals to the peer that they should clean up their local state about the peering.
type ReplicationMessage_Terminated struct {
state protoimpl.MessageState
sizeCache protoimpl.SizeCache
unknownFields protoimpl.UnknownFields
}
func (x *ReplicationMessage_Terminated) Reset() {
*x = ReplicationMessage_Terminated{}
if protoimpl.UnsafeEnabled {
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.
2023-02-17 21:14:46 +00:00
mi := &file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_msgTypes[9]
ms := protoimpl.X.MessageStateOf(protoimpl.Pointer(x))
ms.StoreMessageInfo(mi)
}
}
func (x *ReplicationMessage_Terminated) String() string {
return protoimpl.X.MessageStringOf(x)
}
func (*ReplicationMessage_Terminated) ProtoMessage() {}
func (x *ReplicationMessage_Terminated) ProtoReflect() protoreflect.Message {
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.
2023-02-17 21:14:46 +00:00
mi := &file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_msgTypes[9]
if protoimpl.UnsafeEnabled && x != nil {
ms := protoimpl.X.MessageStateOf(protoimpl.Pointer(x))
if ms.LoadMessageInfo() == nil {
ms.StoreMessageInfo(mi)
}
return ms
}
return mi.MessageOf(x)
}
// Deprecated: Use ReplicationMessage_Terminated.ProtoReflect.Descriptor instead.
func (*ReplicationMessage_Terminated) Descriptor() ([]byte, []int) {
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.
2023-02-17 21:14:46 +00:00
return file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_rawDescGZIP(), []int{0, 3}
}
// Heartbeat is sent to verify that the connection is still active.
type ReplicationMessage_Heartbeat struct {
state protoimpl.MessageState
sizeCache protoimpl.SizeCache
unknownFields protoimpl.UnknownFields
}
func (x *ReplicationMessage_Heartbeat) Reset() {
*x = ReplicationMessage_Heartbeat{}
if protoimpl.UnsafeEnabled {
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.
2023-02-17 21:14:46 +00:00
mi := &file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_msgTypes[10]
ms := protoimpl.X.MessageStateOf(protoimpl.Pointer(x))
ms.StoreMessageInfo(mi)
}
}
func (x *ReplicationMessage_Heartbeat) String() string {
return protoimpl.X.MessageStringOf(x)
}
func (*ReplicationMessage_Heartbeat) ProtoMessage() {}
func (x *ReplicationMessage_Heartbeat) ProtoReflect() protoreflect.Message {
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.
2023-02-17 21:14:46 +00:00
mi := &file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_msgTypes[10]
if protoimpl.UnsafeEnabled && x != nil {
ms := protoimpl.X.MessageStateOf(protoimpl.Pointer(x))
if ms.LoadMessageInfo() == nil {
ms.StoreMessageInfo(mi)
}
return ms
}
return mi.MessageOf(x)
}
// Deprecated: Use ReplicationMessage_Heartbeat.ProtoReflect.Descriptor instead.
func (*ReplicationMessage_Heartbeat) Descriptor() ([]byte, []int) {
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.
2023-02-17 21:14:46 +00:00
return file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_rawDescGZIP(), []int{0, 4}
}
var File_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto protoreflect.FileDescriptor
var file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_rawDesc = []byte{
0x0a, 0x25, 0x70, 0x72, 0x69, 0x76, 0x61, 0x74, 0x65, 0x2f, 0x70, 0x62, 0x70, 0x65, 0x65, 0x72,
0x73, 0x74, 0x72, 0x65, 0x61, 0x6d, 0x2f, 0x70, 0x65, 0x65, 0x72, 0x73, 0x74, 0x72, 0x65, 0x61,
0x6d, 0x2e, 0x70, 0x72, 0x6f, 0x74, 0x6f, 0x12, 0x24, 0x68, 0x61, 0x73, 0x68, 0x69, 0x63, 0x6f,
0x72, 0x70, 0x2e, 0x63, 0x6f, 0x6e, 0x73, 0x75, 0x6c, 0x2e, 0x69, 0x6e, 0x74, 0x65, 0x72, 0x6e,
0x61, 0x6c, 0x2e, 0x70, 0x65, 0x65, 0x72, 0x73, 0x74, 0x72, 0x65, 0x61, 0x6d, 0x1a, 0x25, 0x61,
0x6e, 0x6e, 0x6f, 0x74, 0x61, 0x74, 0x69, 0x6f, 0x6e, 0x73, 0x2f, 0x72, 0x61, 0x74, 0x65, 0x6c,
0x69, 0x6d, 0x69, 0x74, 0x2f, 0x72, 0x61, 0x74, 0x65, 0x6c, 0x69, 0x6d, 0x69, 0x74, 0x2e, 0x70,
0x72, 0x6f, 0x74, 0x6f, 0x1a, 0x19, 0x67, 0x6f, 0x6f, 0x67, 0x6c, 0x65, 0x2f, 0x70, 0x72, 0x6f,
0x74, 0x6f, 0x62, 0x75, 0x66, 0x2f, 0x61, 0x6e, 0x79, 0x2e, 0x70, 0x72, 0x6f, 0x74, 0x6f, 0x1a,
0x1f, 0x70, 0x72, 0x69, 0x76, 0x61, 0x74, 0x65, 0x2f, 0x70, 0x62, 0x70, 0x65, 0x65, 0x72, 0x69,
0x6e, 0x67, 0x2f, 0x70, 0x65, 0x65, 0x72, 0x69, 0x6e, 0x67, 0x2e, 0x70, 0x72, 0x6f, 0x74, 0x6f,
0x1a, 0x1c, 0x70, 0x72, 0x69, 0x76, 0x61, 0x74, 0x65, 0x2f, 0x70, 0x62, 0x73, 0x65, 0x72, 0x76,
0x69, 0x63, 0x65, 0x2f, 0x6e, 0x6f, 0x64, 0x65, 0x2e, 0x70, 0x72, 0x6f, 0x74, 0x6f, 0x1a, 0x1d,
0x70, 0x72, 0x69, 0x76, 0x61, 0x74, 0x65, 0x2f, 0x70, 0x62, 0x73, 0x74, 0x61, 0x74, 0x75, 0x73,
0x2f, 0x73, 0x74, 0x61, 0x74, 0x75, 0x73, 0x2e, 0x70, 0x72, 0x6f, 0x74, 0x6f, 0x22, 0xbb, 0x08,
0x0a, 0x12, 0x52, 0x65, 0x70, 0x6c, 0x69, 0x63, 0x61, 0x74, 0x69, 0x6f, 0x6e, 0x4d, 0x65, 0x73,
0x73, 0x61, 0x67, 0x65, 0x12, 0x53, 0x0a, 0x04, 0x6f, 0x70, 0x65, 0x6e, 0x18, 0x01, 0x20, 0x01,
0x28, 0x0b, 0x32, 0x3d, 0x2e, 0x68, 0x61, 0x73, 0x68, 0x69, 0x63, 0x6f, 0x72, 0x70, 0x2e, 0x63,
0x6f, 0x6e, 0x73, 0x75, 0x6c, 0x2e, 0x69, 0x6e, 0x74, 0x65, 0x72, 0x6e, 0x61, 0x6c, 0x2e, 0x70,
0x65, 0x65, 0x72, 0x73, 0x74, 0x72, 0x65, 0x61, 0x6d, 0x2e, 0x52, 0x65, 0x70, 0x6c, 0x69, 0x63,
0x61, 0x74, 0x69, 0x6f, 0x6e, 0x4d, 0x65, 0x73, 0x73, 0x61, 0x67, 0x65, 0x2e, 0x4f, 0x70, 0x65,
0x6e, 0x48, 0x00, 0x52, 0x04, 0x6f, 0x70, 0x65, 0x6e, 0x12, 0x5c, 0x0a, 0x07, 0x72, 0x65, 0x71,
0x75, 0x65, 0x73, 0x74, 0x18, 0x02, 0x20, 0x01, 0x28, 0x0b, 0x32, 0x40, 0x2e, 0x68, 0x61, 0x73,
0x68, 0x69, 0x63, 0x6f, 0x72, 0x70, 0x2e, 0x63, 0x6f, 0x6e, 0x73, 0x75, 0x6c, 0x2e, 0x69, 0x6e,
0x74, 0x65, 0x72, 0x6e, 0x61, 0x6c, 0x2e, 0x70, 0x65, 0x65, 0x72, 0x73, 0x74, 0x72, 0x65, 0x61,
0x6d, 0x2e, 0x52, 0x65, 0x70, 0x6c, 0x69, 0x63, 0x61, 0x74, 0x69, 0x6f, 0x6e, 0x4d, 0x65, 0x73,
0x73, 0x61, 0x67, 0x65, 0x2e, 0x52, 0x65, 0x71, 0x75, 0x65, 0x73, 0x74, 0x48, 0x00, 0x52, 0x07,
0x72, 0x65, 0x71, 0x75, 0x65, 0x73, 0x74, 0x12, 0x5f, 0x0a, 0x08, 0x72, 0x65, 0x73, 0x70, 0x6f,
0x6e, 0x73, 0x65, 0x18, 0x03, 0x20, 0x01, 0x28, 0x0b, 0x32, 0x41, 0x2e, 0x68, 0x61, 0x73, 0x68,
0x69, 0x63, 0x6f, 0x72, 0x70, 0x2e, 0x63, 0x6f, 0x6e, 0x73, 0x75, 0x6c, 0x2e, 0x69, 0x6e, 0x74,
0x65, 0x72, 0x6e, 0x61, 0x6c, 0x2e, 0x70, 0x65, 0x65, 0x72, 0x73, 0x74, 0x72, 0x65, 0x61, 0x6d,
0x2e, 0x52, 0x65, 0x70, 0x6c, 0x69, 0x63, 0x61, 0x74, 0x69, 0x6f, 0x6e, 0x4d, 0x65, 0x73, 0x73,
0x61, 0x67, 0x65, 0x2e, 0x52, 0x65, 0x73, 0x70, 0x6f, 0x6e, 0x73, 0x65, 0x48, 0x00, 0x52, 0x08,
0x72, 0x65, 0x73, 0x70, 0x6f, 0x6e, 0x73, 0x65, 0x12, 0x65, 0x0a, 0x0a, 0x74, 0x65, 0x72, 0x6d,
0x69, 0x6e, 0x61, 0x74, 0x65, 0x64, 0x18, 0x04, 0x20, 0x01, 0x28, 0x0b, 0x32, 0x43, 0x2e, 0x68,
0x61, 0x73, 0x68, 0x69, 0x63, 0x6f, 0x72, 0x70, 0x2e, 0x63, 0x6f, 0x6e, 0x73, 0x75, 0x6c, 0x2e,
0x69, 0x6e, 0x74, 0x65, 0x72, 0x6e, 0x61, 0x6c, 0x2e, 0x70, 0x65, 0x65, 0x72, 0x73, 0x74, 0x72,
0x65, 0x61, 0x6d, 0x2e, 0x52, 0x65, 0x70, 0x6c, 0x69, 0x63, 0x61, 0x74, 0x69, 0x6f, 0x6e, 0x4d,
0x65, 0x73, 0x73, 0x61, 0x67, 0x65, 0x2e, 0x54, 0x65, 0x72, 0x6d, 0x69, 0x6e, 0x61, 0x74, 0x65,
0x64, 0x48, 0x00, 0x52, 0x0a, 0x74, 0x65, 0x72, 0x6d, 0x69, 0x6e, 0x61, 0x74, 0x65, 0x64, 0x12,
0x62, 0x0a, 0x09, 0x68, 0x65, 0x61, 0x72, 0x74, 0x62, 0x65, 0x61, 0x74, 0x18, 0x05, 0x20, 0x01,
0x28, 0x0b, 0x32, 0x42, 0x2e, 0x68, 0x61, 0x73, 0x68, 0x69, 0x63, 0x6f, 0x72, 0x70, 0x2e, 0x63,
0x6f, 0x6e, 0x73, 0x75, 0x6c, 0x2e, 0x69, 0x6e, 0x74, 0x65, 0x72, 0x6e, 0x61, 0x6c, 0x2e, 0x70,
0x65, 0x65, 0x72, 0x73, 0x74, 0x72, 0x65, 0x61, 0x6d, 0x2e, 0x52, 0x65, 0x70, 0x6c, 0x69, 0x63,
0x61, 0x74, 0x69, 0x6f, 0x6e, 0x4d, 0x65, 0x73, 0x73, 0x61, 0x67, 0x65, 0x2e, 0x48, 0x65, 0x61,
0x72, 0x74, 0x62, 0x65, 0x61, 0x74, 0x48, 0x00, 0x52, 0x09, 0x68, 0x65, 0x61, 0x72, 0x74, 0x62,
0x65, 0x61, 0x74, 0x1a, 0x8d, 0x01, 0x0a, 0x04, 0x4f, 0x70, 0x65, 0x6e, 0x12, 0x16, 0x0a, 0x06,
0x50, 0x65, 0x65, 0x72, 0x49, 0x44, 0x18, 0x01, 0x20, 0x01, 0x28, 0x09, 0x52, 0x06, 0x50, 0x65,
0x65, 0x72, 0x49, 0x44, 0x12, 0x26, 0x0a, 0x0e, 0x53, 0x74, 0x72, 0x65, 0x61, 0x6d, 0x53, 0x65,
0x63, 0x72, 0x65, 0x74, 0x49, 0x44, 0x18, 0x02, 0x20, 0x01, 0x28, 0x09, 0x52, 0x0e, 0x53, 0x74,
0x72, 0x65, 0x61, 0x6d, 0x53, 0x65, 0x63, 0x72, 0x65, 0x74, 0x49, 0x44, 0x12, 0x45, 0x0a, 0x06,
0x52, 0x65, 0x6d, 0x6f, 0x74, 0x65, 0x18, 0x03, 0x20, 0x01, 0x28, 0x0b, 0x32, 0x2d, 0x2e, 0x68,
0x61, 0x73, 0x68, 0x69, 0x63, 0x6f, 0x72, 0x70, 0x2e, 0x63, 0x6f, 0x6e, 0x73, 0x75, 0x6c, 0x2e,
0x69, 0x6e, 0x74, 0x65, 0x72, 0x6e, 0x61, 0x6c, 0x2e, 0x70, 0x65, 0x65, 0x72, 0x69, 0x6e, 0x67,
0x2e, 0x52, 0x65, 0x6d, 0x6f, 0x74, 0x65, 0x49, 0x6e, 0x66, 0x6f, 0x52, 0x06, 0x52, 0x65, 0x6d,
0x6f, 0x74, 0x65, 0x1a, 0xa9, 0x01, 0x0a, 0x07, 0x52, 0x65, 0x71, 0x75, 0x65, 0x73, 0x74, 0x12,
0x16, 0x0a, 0x06, 0x50, 0x65, 0x65, 0x72, 0x49, 0x44, 0x18, 0x01, 0x20, 0x01, 0x28, 0x09, 0x52,
0x06, 0x50, 0x65, 0x65, 0x72, 0x49, 0x44, 0x12, 0x24, 0x0a, 0x0d, 0x52, 0x65, 0x73, 0x70, 0x6f,
0x6e, 0x73, 0x65, 0x4e, 0x6f, 0x6e, 0x63, 0x65, 0x18, 0x02, 0x20, 0x01, 0x28, 0x09, 0x52, 0x0d,
0x52, 0x65, 0x73, 0x70, 0x6f, 0x6e, 0x73, 0x65, 0x4e, 0x6f, 0x6e, 0x63, 0x65, 0x12, 0x20, 0x0a,
0x0b, 0x52, 0x65, 0x73, 0x6f, 0x75, 0x72, 0x63, 0x65, 0x55, 0x52, 0x4c, 0x18, 0x03, 0x20, 0x01,
0x28, 0x09, 0x52, 0x0b, 0x52, 0x65, 0x73, 0x6f, 0x75, 0x72, 0x63, 0x65, 0x55, 0x52, 0x4c, 0x12,
0x3e, 0x0a, 0x05, 0x45, 0x72, 0x72, 0x6f, 0x72, 0x18, 0x05, 0x20, 0x01, 0x28, 0x0b, 0x32, 0x28,
2023-01-04 16:07:02 +00:00
0x2e, 0x68, 0x61, 0x73, 0x68, 0x69, 0x63, 0x6f, 0x72, 0x70, 0x2e, 0x63, 0x6f, 0x6e, 0x73, 0x75,
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.
2023-02-17 21:14:46 +00:00
0x6c, 0x2e, 0x69, 0x6e, 0x74, 0x65, 0x72, 0x6e, 0x61, 0x6c, 0x2e, 0x73, 0x74, 0x61, 0x74, 0x75,
0x73, 0x2e, 0x53, 0x74, 0x61, 0x74, 0x75, 0x73, 0x52, 0x05, 0x45, 0x72, 0x72, 0x6f, 0x72, 0x1a,
0xe3, 0x01, 0x0a, 0x08, 0x52, 0x65, 0x73, 0x70, 0x6f, 0x6e, 0x73, 0x65, 0x12, 0x14, 0x0a, 0x05,
0x4e, 0x6f, 0x6e, 0x63, 0x65, 0x18, 0x01, 0x20, 0x01, 0x28, 0x09, 0x52, 0x05, 0x4e, 0x6f, 0x6e,
2023-01-04 16:07:02 +00:00
0x63, 0x65, 0x12, 0x20, 0x0a, 0x0b, 0x52, 0x65, 0x73, 0x6f, 0x75, 0x72, 0x63, 0x65, 0x55, 0x52,
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.
2023-02-17 21:14:46 +00:00
0x4c, 0x18, 0x02, 0x20, 0x01, 0x28, 0x09, 0x52, 0x0b, 0x52, 0x65, 0x73, 0x6f, 0x75, 0x72, 0x63,
0x65, 0x55, 0x52, 0x4c, 0x12, 0x1e, 0x0a, 0x0a, 0x52, 0x65, 0x73, 0x6f, 0x75, 0x72, 0x63, 0x65,
0x49, 0x44, 0x18, 0x03, 0x20, 0x01, 0x28, 0x09, 0x52, 0x0a, 0x52, 0x65, 0x73, 0x6f, 0x75, 0x72,
0x63, 0x65, 0x49, 0x44, 0x12, 0x30, 0x0a, 0x08, 0x52, 0x65, 0x73, 0x6f, 0x75, 0x72, 0x63, 0x65,
0x18, 0x04, 0x20, 0x01, 0x28, 0x0b, 0x32, 0x14, 0x2e, 0x67, 0x6f, 0x6f, 0x67, 0x6c, 0x65, 0x2e,
0x70, 0x72, 0x6f, 0x74, 0x6f, 0x62, 0x75, 0x66, 0x2e, 0x41, 0x6e, 0x79, 0x52, 0x08, 0x52, 0x65,
0x73, 0x6f, 0x75, 0x72, 0x63, 0x65, 0x12, 0x4d, 0x0a, 0x09, 0x6f, 0x70, 0x65, 0x72, 0x61, 0x74,
0x69, 0x6f, 0x6e, 0x18, 0x05, 0x20, 0x01, 0x28, 0x0e, 0x32, 0x2f, 0x2e, 0x68, 0x61, 0x73, 0x68,
0x69, 0x63, 0x6f, 0x72, 0x70, 0x2e, 0x63, 0x6f, 0x6e, 0x73, 0x75, 0x6c, 0x2e, 0x69, 0x6e, 0x74,
0x65, 0x72, 0x6e, 0x61, 0x6c, 0x2e, 0x70, 0x65, 0x65, 0x72, 0x73, 0x74, 0x72, 0x65, 0x61, 0x6d,
0x2e, 0x4f, 0x70, 0x65, 0x72, 0x61, 0x74, 0x69, 0x6f, 0x6e, 0x52, 0x09, 0x6f, 0x70, 0x65, 0x72,
0x61, 0x74, 0x69, 0x6f, 0x6e, 0x1a, 0x0c, 0x0a, 0x0a, 0x54, 0x65, 0x72, 0x6d, 0x69, 0x6e, 0x61,
0x74, 0x65, 0x64, 0x1a, 0x0b, 0x0a, 0x09, 0x48, 0x65, 0x61, 0x72, 0x74, 0x62, 0x65, 0x61, 0x74,
0x42, 0x09, 0x0a, 0x07, 0x50, 0x61, 0x79, 0x6c, 0x6f, 0x61, 0x64, 0x22, 0x29, 0x0a, 0x0d, 0x4c,
0x65, 0x61, 0x64, 0x65, 0x72, 0x41, 0x64, 0x64, 0x72, 0x65, 0x73, 0x73, 0x12, 0x18, 0x0a, 0x07,
0x61, 0x64, 0x64, 0x72, 0x65, 0x73, 0x73, 0x18, 0x01, 0x20, 0x01, 0x28, 0x09, 0x52, 0x07, 0x61,
0x64, 0x64, 0x72, 0x65, 0x73, 0x73, 0x22, 0x5c, 0x0a, 0x0f, 0x45, 0x78, 0x70, 0x6f, 0x72, 0x74,
0x65, 0x64, 0x53, 0x65, 0x72, 0x76, 0x69, 0x63, 0x65, 0x12, 0x49, 0x0a, 0x05, 0x4e, 0x6f, 0x64,
0x65, 0x73, 0x18, 0x01, 0x20, 0x03, 0x28, 0x0b, 0x32, 0x33, 0x2e, 0x68, 0x61, 0x73, 0x68, 0x69,
2023-01-04 16:07:02 +00:00
0x63, 0x6f, 0x72, 0x70, 0x2e, 0x63, 0x6f, 0x6e, 0x73, 0x75, 0x6c, 0x2e, 0x69, 0x6e, 0x74, 0x65,
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.
2023-02-17 21:14:46 +00:00
0x72, 0x6e, 0x61, 0x6c, 0x2e, 0x73, 0x65, 0x72, 0x76, 0x69, 0x63, 0x65, 0x2e, 0x43, 0x68, 0x65,
0x63, 0x6b, 0x53, 0x65, 0x72, 0x76, 0x69, 0x63, 0x65, 0x4e, 0x6f, 0x64, 0x65, 0x52, 0x05, 0x4e,
0x6f, 0x64, 0x65, 0x73, 0x22, 0x31, 0x0a, 0x13, 0x45, 0x78, 0x70, 0x6f, 0x72, 0x74, 0x65, 0x64,
0x53, 0x65, 0x72, 0x76, 0x69, 0x63, 0x65, 0x4c, 0x69, 0x73, 0x74, 0x12, 0x1a, 0x0a, 0x08, 0x53,
0x65, 0x72, 0x76, 0x69, 0x63, 0x65, 0x73, 0x18, 0x01, 0x20, 0x03, 0x28, 0x09, 0x52, 0x08, 0x53,
0x65, 0x72, 0x76, 0x69, 0x63, 0x65, 0x73, 0x22, 0x61, 0x0a, 0x15, 0x45, 0x78, 0x63, 0x68, 0x61,
0x6e, 0x67, 0x65, 0x53, 0x65, 0x63, 0x72, 0x65, 0x74, 0x52, 0x65, 0x71, 0x75, 0x65, 0x73, 0x74,
0x12, 0x16, 0x0a, 0x06, 0x50, 0x65, 0x65, 0x72, 0x49, 0x44, 0x18, 0x01, 0x20, 0x01, 0x28, 0x09,
0x52, 0x06, 0x50, 0x65, 0x65, 0x72, 0x49, 0x44, 0x12, 0x30, 0x0a, 0x13, 0x45, 0x73, 0x74, 0x61,
0x62, 0x6c, 0x69, 0x73, 0x68, 0x6d, 0x65, 0x6e, 0x74, 0x53, 0x65, 0x63, 0x72, 0x65, 0x74, 0x18,
0x02, 0x20, 0x01, 0x28, 0x09, 0x52, 0x13, 0x45, 0x73, 0x74, 0x61, 0x62, 0x6c, 0x69, 0x73, 0x68,
0x6d, 0x65, 0x6e, 0x74, 0x53, 0x65, 0x63, 0x72, 0x65, 0x74, 0x22, 0x3c, 0x0a, 0x16, 0x45, 0x78,
0x63, 0x68, 0x61, 0x6e, 0x67, 0x65, 0x53, 0x65, 0x63, 0x72, 0x65, 0x74, 0x52, 0x65, 0x73, 0x70,
0x6f, 0x6e, 0x73, 0x65, 0x12, 0x22, 0x0a, 0x0c, 0x53, 0x74, 0x72, 0x65, 0x61, 0x6d, 0x53, 0x65,
0x63, 0x72, 0x65, 0x74, 0x18, 0x01, 0x20, 0x01, 0x28, 0x09, 0x52, 0x0c, 0x53, 0x74, 0x72, 0x65,
0x61, 0x6d, 0x53, 0x65, 0x63, 0x72, 0x65, 0x74, 0x2a, 0x3c, 0x0a, 0x09, 0x4f, 0x70, 0x65, 0x72,
0x61, 0x74, 0x69, 0x6f, 0x6e, 0x12, 0x19, 0x0a, 0x15, 0x4f, 0x50, 0x45, 0x52, 0x41, 0x54, 0x49,
0x4f, 0x4e, 0x5f, 0x55, 0x4e, 0x53, 0x50, 0x45, 0x43, 0x49, 0x46, 0x49, 0x45, 0x44, 0x10, 0x00,
0x12, 0x14, 0x0a, 0x10, 0x4f, 0x50, 0x45, 0x52, 0x41, 0x54, 0x49, 0x4f, 0x4e, 0x5f, 0x55, 0x50,
0x53, 0x45, 0x52, 0x54, 0x10, 0x01, 0x32, 0xc1, 0x02, 0x0a, 0x11, 0x50, 0x65, 0x65, 0x72, 0x53,
0x74, 0x72, 0x65, 0x61, 0x6d, 0x53, 0x65, 0x72, 0x76, 0x69, 0x63, 0x65, 0x12, 0x93, 0x01, 0x0a,
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.
2023-02-17 21:14:46 +00:00
0x0f, 0x53, 0x74, 0x72, 0x65, 0x61, 0x6d, 0x52, 0x65, 0x73, 0x6f, 0x75, 0x72, 0x63, 0x65, 0x73,
0x12, 0x38, 0x2e, 0x68, 0x61, 0x73, 0x68, 0x69, 0x63, 0x6f, 0x72, 0x70, 0x2e, 0x63, 0x6f, 0x6e,
0x73, 0x75, 0x6c, 0x2e, 0x69, 0x6e, 0x74, 0x65, 0x72, 0x6e, 0x61, 0x6c, 0x2e, 0x70, 0x65, 0x65,
0x72, 0x73, 0x74, 0x72, 0x65, 0x61, 0x6d, 0x2e, 0x52, 0x65, 0x70, 0x6c, 0x69, 0x63, 0x61, 0x74,
0x69, 0x6f, 0x6e, 0x4d, 0x65, 0x73, 0x73, 0x61, 0x67, 0x65, 0x1a, 0x38, 0x2e, 0x68, 0x61, 0x73,
0x68, 0x69, 0x63, 0x6f, 0x72, 0x70, 0x2e, 0x63, 0x6f, 0x6e, 0x73, 0x75, 0x6c, 0x2e, 0x69, 0x6e,
0x74, 0x65, 0x72, 0x6e, 0x61, 0x6c, 0x2e, 0x70, 0x65, 0x65, 0x72, 0x73, 0x74, 0x72, 0x65, 0x61,
0x6d, 0x2e, 0x52, 0x65, 0x70, 0x6c, 0x69, 0x63, 0x61, 0x74, 0x69, 0x6f, 0x6e, 0x4d, 0x65, 0x73,
0x73, 0x61, 0x67, 0x65, 0x22, 0x08, 0xe2, 0x86, 0x04, 0x04, 0x08, 0x02, 0x10, 0x02, 0x28, 0x01,
0x30, 0x01, 0x12, 0x95, 0x01, 0x0a, 0x0e, 0x45, 0x78, 0x63, 0x68, 0x61, 0x6e, 0x67, 0x65, 0x53,
0x65, 0x63, 0x72, 0x65, 0x74, 0x12, 0x3b, 0x2e, 0x68, 0x61, 0x73, 0x68, 0x69, 0x63, 0x6f, 0x72,
0x70, 0x2e, 0x63, 0x6f, 0x6e, 0x73, 0x75, 0x6c, 0x2e, 0x69, 0x6e, 0x74, 0x65, 0x72, 0x6e, 0x61,
0x6c, 0x2e, 0x70, 0x65, 0x65, 0x72, 0x73, 0x74, 0x72, 0x65, 0x61, 0x6d, 0x2e, 0x45, 0x78, 0x63,
0x68, 0x61, 0x6e, 0x67, 0x65, 0x53, 0x65, 0x63, 0x72, 0x65, 0x74, 0x52, 0x65, 0x71, 0x75, 0x65,
0x73, 0x74, 0x1a, 0x3c, 0x2e, 0x68, 0x61, 0x73, 0x68, 0x69, 0x63, 0x6f, 0x72, 0x70, 0x2e, 0x63,
0x6f, 0x6e, 0x73, 0x75, 0x6c, 0x2e, 0x69, 0x6e, 0x74, 0x65, 0x72, 0x6e, 0x61, 0x6c, 0x2e, 0x70,
0x65, 0x65, 0x72, 0x73, 0x74, 0x72, 0x65, 0x61, 0x6d, 0x2e, 0x45, 0x78, 0x63, 0x68, 0x61, 0x6e,
0x67, 0x65, 0x53, 0x65, 0x63, 0x72, 0x65, 0x74, 0x52, 0x65, 0x73, 0x70, 0x6f, 0x6e, 0x73, 0x65,
0x22, 0x08, 0xe2, 0x86, 0x04, 0x04, 0x08, 0x03, 0x10, 0x02, 0x42, 0xa7, 0x02, 0x0a, 0x28, 0x63,
0x6f, 0x6d, 0x2e, 0x68, 0x61, 0x73, 0x68, 0x69, 0x63, 0x6f, 0x72, 0x70, 0x2e, 0x63, 0x6f, 0x6e,
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.
2023-02-17 21:14:46 +00:00
0x73, 0x75, 0x6c, 0x2e, 0x69, 0x6e, 0x74, 0x65, 0x72, 0x6e, 0x61, 0x6c, 0x2e, 0x70, 0x65, 0x65,
0x72, 0x73, 0x74, 0x72, 0x65, 0x61, 0x6d, 0x42, 0x0f, 0x50, 0x65, 0x65, 0x72, 0x73, 0x74, 0x72,
0x65, 0x61, 0x6d, 0x50, 0x72, 0x6f, 0x74, 0x6f, 0x50, 0x01, 0x5a, 0x36, 0x67, 0x69, 0x74, 0x68,
0x75, 0x62, 0x2e, 0x63, 0x6f, 0x6d, 0x2f, 0x68, 0x61, 0x73, 0x68, 0x69, 0x63, 0x6f, 0x72, 0x70,
0x2f, 0x63, 0x6f, 0x6e, 0x73, 0x75, 0x6c, 0x2f, 0x70, 0x72, 0x6f, 0x74, 0x6f, 0x2f, 0x70, 0x72,
0x69, 0x76, 0x61, 0x74, 0x65, 0x2f, 0x70, 0x62, 0x70, 0x65, 0x65, 0x72, 0x73, 0x74, 0x72, 0x65,
0x61, 0x6d, 0xa2, 0x02, 0x04, 0x48, 0x43, 0x49, 0x50, 0xaa, 0x02, 0x24, 0x48, 0x61, 0x73, 0x68,
0x69, 0x63, 0x6f, 0x72, 0x70, 0x2e, 0x43, 0x6f, 0x6e, 0x73, 0x75, 0x6c, 0x2e, 0x49, 0x6e, 0x74,
0x65, 0x72, 0x6e, 0x61, 0x6c, 0x2e, 0x50, 0x65, 0x65, 0x72, 0x73, 0x74, 0x72, 0x65, 0x61, 0x6d,
0xca, 0x02, 0x24, 0x48, 0x61, 0x73, 0x68, 0x69, 0x63, 0x6f, 0x72, 0x70, 0x5c, 0x43, 0x6f, 0x6e,
0x73, 0x75, 0x6c, 0x5c, 0x49, 0x6e, 0x74, 0x65, 0x72, 0x6e, 0x61, 0x6c, 0x5c, 0x50, 0x65, 0x65,
0x72, 0x73, 0x74, 0x72, 0x65, 0x61, 0x6d, 0xe2, 0x02, 0x30, 0x48, 0x61, 0x73, 0x68, 0x69, 0x63,
0x6f, 0x72, 0x70, 0x5c, 0x43, 0x6f, 0x6e, 0x73, 0x75, 0x6c, 0x5c, 0x49, 0x6e, 0x74, 0x65, 0x72,
0x6e, 0x61, 0x6c, 0x5c, 0x50, 0x65, 0x65, 0x72, 0x73, 0x74, 0x72, 0x65, 0x61, 0x6d, 0x5c, 0x47,
0x50, 0x42, 0x4d, 0x65, 0x74, 0x61, 0x64, 0x61, 0x74, 0x61, 0xea, 0x02, 0x27, 0x48, 0x61, 0x73,
0x68, 0x69, 0x63, 0x6f, 0x72, 0x70, 0x3a, 0x3a, 0x43, 0x6f, 0x6e, 0x73, 0x75, 0x6c, 0x3a, 0x3a,
0x49, 0x6e, 0x74, 0x65, 0x72, 0x6e, 0x61, 0x6c, 0x3a, 0x3a, 0x50, 0x65, 0x65, 0x72, 0x73, 0x74,
0x72, 0x65, 0x61, 0x6d, 0x62, 0x06, 0x70, 0x72, 0x6f, 0x74, 0x6f, 0x33,
}
var (
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.
2023-02-17 21:14:46 +00:00
file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_rawDescOnce sync.Once
file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_rawDescData = file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_rawDesc
)
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.
2023-02-17 21:14:46 +00:00
func file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_rawDescGZIP() []byte {
file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_rawDescOnce.Do(func() {
file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_rawDescData = protoimpl.X.CompressGZIP(file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_rawDescData)
})
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.
2023-02-17 21:14:46 +00:00
return file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_rawDescData
}
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.
2023-02-17 21:14:46 +00:00
var file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_enumTypes = make([]protoimpl.EnumInfo, 1)
var file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_msgTypes = make([]protoimpl.MessageInfo, 11)
var file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_goTypes = []interface{}{
(Operation)(0), // 0: hashicorp.consul.internal.peerstream.Operation
(*ReplicationMessage)(nil), // 1: hashicorp.consul.internal.peerstream.ReplicationMessage
(*LeaderAddress)(nil), // 2: hashicorp.consul.internal.peerstream.LeaderAddress
(*ExportedService)(nil), // 3: hashicorp.consul.internal.peerstream.ExportedService
(*ExportedServiceList)(nil), // 4: hashicorp.consul.internal.peerstream.ExportedServiceList
(*ExchangeSecretRequest)(nil), // 5: hashicorp.consul.internal.peerstream.ExchangeSecretRequest
(*ExchangeSecretResponse)(nil), // 6: hashicorp.consul.internal.peerstream.ExchangeSecretResponse
(*ReplicationMessage_Open)(nil), // 7: hashicorp.consul.internal.peerstream.ReplicationMessage.Open
(*ReplicationMessage_Request)(nil), // 8: hashicorp.consul.internal.peerstream.ReplicationMessage.Request
(*ReplicationMessage_Response)(nil), // 9: hashicorp.consul.internal.peerstream.ReplicationMessage.Response
(*ReplicationMessage_Terminated)(nil), // 10: hashicorp.consul.internal.peerstream.ReplicationMessage.Terminated
(*ReplicationMessage_Heartbeat)(nil), // 11: hashicorp.consul.internal.peerstream.ReplicationMessage.Heartbeat
(*pbservice.CheckServiceNode)(nil), // 12: hashicorp.consul.internal.service.CheckServiceNode
(*pbpeering.RemoteInfo)(nil), // 13: hashicorp.consul.internal.peering.RemoteInfo
(*pbstatus.Status)(nil), // 14: hashicorp.consul.internal.status.Status
(*anypb.Any)(nil), // 15: google.protobuf.Any
}
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.
2023-02-17 21:14:46 +00:00
var file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_depIdxs = []int32{
7, // 0: hashicorp.consul.internal.peerstream.ReplicationMessage.open:type_name -> hashicorp.consul.internal.peerstream.ReplicationMessage.Open
8, // 1: hashicorp.consul.internal.peerstream.ReplicationMessage.request:type_name -> hashicorp.consul.internal.peerstream.ReplicationMessage.Request
9, // 2: hashicorp.consul.internal.peerstream.ReplicationMessage.response:type_name -> hashicorp.consul.internal.peerstream.ReplicationMessage.Response
10, // 3: hashicorp.consul.internal.peerstream.ReplicationMessage.terminated:type_name -> hashicorp.consul.internal.peerstream.ReplicationMessage.Terminated
11, // 4: hashicorp.consul.internal.peerstream.ReplicationMessage.heartbeat:type_name -> hashicorp.consul.internal.peerstream.ReplicationMessage.Heartbeat
12, // 5: hashicorp.consul.internal.peerstream.ExportedService.Nodes:type_name -> hashicorp.consul.internal.service.CheckServiceNode
13, // 6: hashicorp.consul.internal.peerstream.ReplicationMessage.Open.Remote:type_name -> hashicorp.consul.internal.peering.RemoteInfo
14, // 7: hashicorp.consul.internal.peerstream.ReplicationMessage.Request.Error:type_name -> hashicorp.consul.internal.status.Status
15, // 8: hashicorp.consul.internal.peerstream.ReplicationMessage.Response.Resource:type_name -> google.protobuf.Any
0, // 9: hashicorp.consul.internal.peerstream.ReplicationMessage.Response.operation:type_name -> hashicorp.consul.internal.peerstream.Operation
1, // 10: hashicorp.consul.internal.peerstream.PeerStreamService.StreamResources:input_type -> hashicorp.consul.internal.peerstream.ReplicationMessage
5, // 11: hashicorp.consul.internal.peerstream.PeerStreamService.ExchangeSecret:input_type -> hashicorp.consul.internal.peerstream.ExchangeSecretRequest
1, // 12: hashicorp.consul.internal.peerstream.PeerStreamService.StreamResources:output_type -> hashicorp.consul.internal.peerstream.ReplicationMessage
6, // 13: hashicorp.consul.internal.peerstream.PeerStreamService.ExchangeSecret:output_type -> hashicorp.consul.internal.peerstream.ExchangeSecretResponse
12, // [12:14] is the sub-list for method output_type
10, // [10:12] is the sub-list for method input_type
10, // [10:10] is the sub-list for extension type_name
10, // [10:10] is the sub-list for extension extendee
0, // [0:10] is the sub-list for field type_name
}
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.
2023-02-17 21:14:46 +00:00
func init() { file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_init() }
func file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_init() {
if File_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto != nil {
return
}
if !protoimpl.UnsafeEnabled {
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.
2023-02-17 21:14:46 +00:00
file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_msgTypes[0].Exporter = func(v interface{}, i int) interface{} {
switch v := v.(*ReplicationMessage); i {
case 0:
return &v.state
case 1:
return &v.sizeCache
case 2:
return &v.unknownFields
default:
return nil
}
}
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.
2023-02-17 21:14:46 +00:00
file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_msgTypes[1].Exporter = func(v interface{}, i int) interface{} {
switch v := v.(*LeaderAddress); i {
case 0:
return &v.state
case 1:
return &v.sizeCache
case 2:
return &v.unknownFields
default:
return nil
}
}
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.
2023-02-17 21:14:46 +00:00
file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_msgTypes[2].Exporter = func(v interface{}, i int) interface{} {
switch v := v.(*ExportedService); i {
case 0:
return &v.state
case 1:
return &v.sizeCache
case 2:
return &v.unknownFields
default:
return nil
}
}
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.
2023-02-17 21:14:46 +00:00
file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_msgTypes[3].Exporter = func(v interface{}, i int) interface{} {
switch v := v.(*ExportedServiceList); i {
case 0:
return &v.state
case 1:
return &v.sizeCache
case 2:
return &v.unknownFields
default:
return nil
}
}
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.
2023-02-17 21:14:46 +00:00
file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_msgTypes[4].Exporter = func(v interface{}, i int) interface{} {
switch v := v.(*ExchangeSecretRequest); i {
case 0:
return &v.state
case 1:
return &v.sizeCache
case 2:
return &v.unknownFields
default:
return nil
}
}
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.
2023-02-17 21:14:46 +00:00
file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_msgTypes[5].Exporter = func(v interface{}, i int) interface{} {
switch v := v.(*ExchangeSecretResponse); i {
case 0:
return &v.state
case 1:
return &v.sizeCache
case 2:
return &v.unknownFields
default:
return nil
}
}
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.
2023-02-17 21:14:46 +00:00
file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_msgTypes[6].Exporter = func(v interface{}, i int) interface{} {
switch v := v.(*ReplicationMessage_Open); i {
case 0:
return &v.state
case 1:
return &v.sizeCache
case 2:
return &v.unknownFields
default:
return nil
}
}
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.
2023-02-17 21:14:46 +00:00
file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_msgTypes[7].Exporter = func(v interface{}, i int) interface{} {
switch v := v.(*ReplicationMessage_Request); i {
case 0:
return &v.state
case 1:
return &v.sizeCache
case 2:
return &v.unknownFields
default:
return nil
}
}
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.
2023-02-17 21:14:46 +00:00
file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_msgTypes[8].Exporter = func(v interface{}, i int) interface{} {
switch v := v.(*ReplicationMessage_Response); i {
case 0:
return &v.state
case 1:
return &v.sizeCache
case 2:
return &v.unknownFields
default:
return nil
}
}
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.
2023-02-17 21:14:46 +00:00
file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_msgTypes[9].Exporter = func(v interface{}, i int) interface{} {
switch v := v.(*ReplicationMessage_Terminated); i {
case 0:
return &v.state
case 1:
return &v.sizeCache
case 2:
return &v.unknownFields
default:
return nil
}
}
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.
2023-02-17 21:14:46 +00:00
file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_msgTypes[10].Exporter = func(v interface{}, i int) interface{} {
switch v := v.(*ReplicationMessage_Heartbeat); i {
case 0:
return &v.state
case 1:
return &v.sizeCache
case 2:
return &v.unknownFields
default:
return nil
}
}
}
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.
2023-02-17 21:14:46 +00:00
file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_msgTypes[0].OneofWrappers = []interface{}{
(*ReplicationMessage_Open_)(nil),
(*ReplicationMessage_Request_)(nil),
(*ReplicationMessage_Response_)(nil),
(*ReplicationMessage_Terminated_)(nil),
(*ReplicationMessage_Heartbeat_)(nil),
}
type x struct{}
out := protoimpl.TypeBuilder{
File: protoimpl.DescBuilder{
GoPackagePath: reflect.TypeOf(x{}).PkgPath(),
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.
2023-02-17 21:14:46 +00:00
RawDescriptor: file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_rawDesc,
NumEnums: 1,
NumMessages: 11,
NumExtensions: 0,
NumServices: 1,
},
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.
2023-02-17 21:14:46 +00:00
GoTypes: file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_goTypes,
DependencyIndexes: file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_depIdxs,
EnumInfos: file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_enumTypes,
MessageInfos: file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_msgTypes,
}.Build()
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.
2023-02-17 21:14:46 +00:00
File_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto = out.File
file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_rawDesc = nil
file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_goTypes = nil
file_private_pbpeerstream_peerstream_proto_depIdxs = nil
}