Dear Ozone Devs,
I am currently developing some features related to StoragePolicy and have encountered an issue for which I am seeking a solution. ## What I want to do - Move the enum `StorageTypeProto` from `ScmServerDatanodeHeartbeatProtocol.proto` to `hdds.proto`. - Most of the protobuf definitions that need to be imported in our project are located in `hdds.proto`, so I want to move enum `StorageTypeProto` to `hdds.proto`. - Standardize the usage of `hdds.proto#StorageTypeProto` across all protobuf files in the project. - This would require removing `ScmServerDatanodeHeartbeatProtocol.proto#StorageTypeProto` and `OmClientProtocol.proto#StorageTypeProto`. ## The error I encountered However, I encountered an issue where `proto-backwards-compatibility` throws errors after moving the `enum StorageTypeProto`. ```bash [INFO] --- proto-backwards-compatibility:1.0.7:backwards-compatibility-check (default) @ hdds-interface-server --- //... [ERROR] CONFLICT: "StorageTypeProto" field: "ARCHIVE" has been removed, but is not reserved [ScmServerDatanodeHeartbeatProtocol.proto] [ERROR] CONFLICT: "StorageTypeProto" field: "DISK" has been removed, but is not reserved [ScmServerDatanodeHeartbeatProtocol.proto] [ERROR] CONFLICT: "StorageTypeProto" field: "PROVIDED" has been removed, but is not reserved [ScmServerDatanodeHeartbeatProtocol.proto] [ERROR] CONFLICT: "StorageTypeProto" field: "RAM_DISK" has been removed, but is not reserved [ScmServerDatanodeHeartbeatProtocol.proto] [ERROR] CONFLICT: "StorageTypeProto" field: "SSD" has been removed, but is not reserved [ScmServerDatanodeHeartbeatProtocol.proto] [ERROR] CONFLICT: "StorageTypeProto" integer: "1" has been removed, but is not reserved [ScmServerDatanodeHeartbeatProtocol.proto] [ERROR] CONFLICT: "StorageTypeProto" integer: "2" has been removed, but is not reserved [ScmServerDatanodeHeartbeatProtocol.proto] [ERROR] CONFLICT: "StorageTypeProto" integer: "3" has been removed, but is not reserved [ScmServerDatanodeHeartbeatProtocol.proto] [ERROR] CONFLICT: "StorageTypeProto" integer: "4" has been removed, but is not reserved [ScmServerDatanodeHeartbeatProtocol.proto] [ERROR] CONFLICT: "StorageTypeProto" integer: "5" has been removed, but is not reserved [ScmServerDatanodeHeartbeatProtocol.proto] ``` ## My question - Will there be any compatibility issues after moving enum `StorageTypeProto` from `ScmServerDatanodeHeartbeatProtocol.proto` to `hdds.proto` and standardize, and change all the places where `StorageTypeProto` is used in the existing protobuf to `hdds.proto#StorageTypeProto`? - According to my tests, when I add the compile flag `-DallowBreakingChanges=true` to bypass the errors, old clients can still successfully execute create/list bucket operations. - As I understand it, the `field id` of a protobuf enum is what matters, as the `id` is the valid payload, while changes to the enum's field names or the package in which the enum is defined should not cause compatibility issues (though we will need to update the relevant Java code to reflect these changes). - If this does not cause compatibility issues, how should I handle the errors reported by `proto-backwards-compatibility`?
