Skip to content

Conversation

@mkruskal-google
Copy link
Contributor

gRPC doesn't do anything sensitive to the new 2024 features

gRPC doesn't do anything sensitive to the new 2024 features
@sergiitk sergiitk requested a review from ejona86 November 6, 2025 21:11
@sergiitk sergiitk added the kokoro:run Add this label to a PR to tell Kokoro the code is safe and tests can be run label Nov 6, 2025
@grpc-kokoro grpc-kokoro removed the kokoro:run Add this label to a PR to tell Kokoro the code is safe and tests can be run label Nov 6, 2025
@sergiitk
Copy link
Member

sergiitk commented Nov 6, 2025

ref cl/829077940

@sergiitk
Copy link
Member

sergiitk commented Nov 6, 2025

/gcbrun

Copy link
Member

@ejona86 ejona86 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

EDITION_2024 symbol was added in 26.0 protocolbuffers/protobuf@f441ce8 . Luckily we are on 26.1.

But I'm not certain that is enough. At the very least, features.(pb.java).nest_in_file_class looks like it requires libprotoc support, and we're probably on too old of a version. I dunno about features.default_symbol_visibility. FWIW, it's unclear to me how to figure out what was added in an addition, for us to check compatibility.

So I suspect this actually needs some protobuf version detection. It looks like we should be detecting v32.0+ to change the returned edition supported.

@mkruskal-google
Copy link
Contributor Author

Protoc itself will reject 2024 protos if it's earlier than 32.0. But you make a good point that if you're building against an older version of libprotoc the java naming helpers you're using might not support the changes we made to java_multiple_files and java_outer_classname yet (symbol visibility isn't an issue for plugins).

How realistic would it be to either:

  1. Bump the libprotoc dependency to a newer version that actually supports 2024
  2. Copybara strip this so we can at least enable 2024 in google3

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants