Errors will happen when upgrading the libraries

[KateGo520]

(The purpose of this report is to alert DataDog/pupernetes to the possible problems when DataDog/pupernetes try to upgrade the following dependencies)

An error will happen when upgrading libraries _coreos/go-systemd _, spf13/cobra and prometheus/client_golang:

For example----

github.com/coreos/go-systemd

-Latest Version: v22.1.0 (Latest commit b51e752 17 days ago)
-Where did you use it:
https://github.com/alibaba/pouch/search?q=github.com%2Fcoreos%2Fgo-systemd&unscoped_q=github.com%2Fcoreos%2Fgo-systemd
-Detail:

github.com/coreos/go-systemd/go.mod

module github.com/coreos/go-systemd/v22
go 1.12
require github.com/godbus/dbus/v5 v5.0.3 

github.com/coreos/go-systemd/util/util_cgo.go

package util
import (
	"github.com/coreos/go-systemd/v22/internal/dlopen"
) 

This problem was introduced since coreos/go-systemd v22.0.0 . Now you used version v16. If you try to upgrade coreos/go-systemd to version v22.0.0 and above, you will get an error--- no package exists at "github.com/coreos/go-systemd/v22"

Similar issues can also happen when upgrading libraries prometheus/client_golang and github.com/spf13/cobra.

I investigated the libraries (spf13/cobra, prometheus/client_golang and coreos/go-systemd) release information and found the root cause of this issue is that----

1. These dependencies all added Go modules in the recent versions.

2. They all comply with the specification of "Releasing Modules for v2 or higher" available in the Modules documentation. Quoting the specification:

A package that has migrated to Go Modules must include the major version in the import path to reference any v2+ modules. For example, Repo github.com/my/module migrated to Modules on version v3.x.y. Then this repo should declare its module path with MAJOR version suffix "/v3" (e.g., module github.com/my/module/v3), and its downstream project should use "github.com/my/module/v3/mypkg" to import this repo’s package.

3. This "github.com/my/module/v3/mypkg" is not the physical path. So earlier versions of Go (including those that don't have minimal module awareness) plus all tooling (like dep, glide, govendor, etc) don't have minimal module awareness as of now and therefore don't handle import paths correctly See golang/dep#1962, golang/dep#2139.

Note: creating a new branch is not required. If instead you have been previously releasing on master and would prefer to tag v3.0.0 on master, that is a viable option. (However, be aware that introducing an incompatible API change in master can cause issues for non-modules users who issue a go get -u given the go tool is not aware of semver prior to Go 1.11 or when module mode is not enabled in Go 1.11+).
Pre-existing dependency management solutions such as dep currently can have problems consuming a v2+ module created in this way. See for example dep#1962.
https://github.com/golang/go/wiki/Modules#releasing-modules-v2-or-higher

Solution

1. Migrate to Go Modules.

Go Modules is the general trend of ecosystem, if you want a better upgrade package experience, migrating to Go Modules is a good choice.

Migrate to modules will be accompanied by the introduction of virtual paths(It was discussed above).

This "github.com/my/module/v3/mypkg" is not the physical path. So Go versions older than 1.9.7 and 1.10.3 plus all third-party dependency management tools (like dep, glide, govendor, etc) don't have minimal module awareness as of now and therefore don't handle import paths correctly.

Then the downstream projects might be negatively affected in their building if they are module-unaware (Go versions older than 1.9.7 and 1.10.3; Or use third-party dependency management tools, such as: Dep, glide, govendor…).

2. Maintaining v2+ libraries that use Go Modules in Vendor directories.

If DataDog/pupernetes want to keep using the dependency manage tools (like dep, glide, govendor, etc), and still want to upgrade the dependencies, can choose this fix strategy.
Manually download the dependencies into the vendor directory and do compatibility dispose(materialize the virtual path or delete the virtual part of the path). Avoid fetching the dependencies by virtual import paths. This may add some maintenance overhead compared to using modules.

As the import paths have different meanings between the projects adopting module repos and the non-module repos, materialize the virtual path is a better way to solve the issue, while ensuring compatibility with downstream module users. A textbook example provided by repo github.com/moby/moby is here:
https://github.com/moby/moby/blob/master/VENDORING.md
https://github.com/moby/moby/blob/master/vendor.conf
In the vendor directory, github.com/moby/moby adds the /vN subdirectory in the corresponding dependencies.
This will help more downstream module users to work well with your package.

3. Request upstream to do compatibility processing.

The coreos/go-systemd have 478 module-unaware users in github, such as: docker/docker-ce, moby/moby, pamarquez/K3S…
https://github.com/search?q=coreos%2Fgo-systemd+filename%3Avendor.conf+filename%3Avendor.json+filename%3Aglide.toml+filename%3AGodep.toml+filename%3AGodep.json

Summary

You can make a choice when you meet this DM issues by balancing your own development schedules/mode against the affects on the downstream projects.

For this issue, Solution 1 can maximize your benefits and with minimal impacts to your downstream projects the ecosystem.

References

• https://github.com/golang/go/wiki/Modules#semantic-import-versioning
• https://golang.org/cmd/go/#hdr-Module_compatibility_and_semantic_versioning
• https://github.com/golang/go/wiki/Modules#releasing-modules-v2-or-higher

Do you plan to upgrade the libraries in near future?
Hope this issue report can help you ^_^
Thank you very much for your attention.

Best regards,
Kate

[KateGo520]

@vboulineau @JulienBalestra Could you help me review this issue? Thx :p
By the way, have you ever encountered such errors when upgading the libraries?

[JulienBalestra]

@KateGo520 thank you very much for the issue, I agree with you we should migrate this project under the go modules.

I'm planning to do it in the coming month, however if you have some dangling branch to make it works, happy to review it !

[KateGo520]

@JulienBalestra Thanks for your reply. This report is a warm prompt for you to prevent or combat this issue. Just let you know the problem if you upgrade this dependency in near future.

Wish you every success in migrating to Go Modules！
Thanks again.
Kate