You can not select more than 25 topics
Topics must start with a letter or number, can include dashes ('-') and can be up to 35 characters long.
190 lines
11 KiB
190 lines
11 KiB
# API versioning guidelines |
|
|
|
The Envoy project (and in the future [UDPA](https://github.com/cncf/udpa)) takes API stability and |
|
versioning seriously. Providing stable APIs is a necessary step in ensuring API adoption and success |
|
of the ecosystem. Below we articulate the API versioning guidelines that aim to deliver this |
|
stability. |
|
|
|
# API semantic versioning |
|
|
|
The Envoy APIs consist of a family of packages, e.g. `envoy.admin.v2alpha`, |
|
`envoy.service.trace.v2`. Each package is independently versioned with a protobuf semantic |
|
versioning scheme based on https://cloud.google.com/apis/design/versioning. |
|
|
|
The major version for a package is captured in its name (and directory structure). E.g. version 2 |
|
of the tracing API package is named `envoy.service.trace.v2` and its constituent protos are located |
|
in `api/envoy/service/trace/v2`. Every protobuf must live directly in a versioned package namespace, |
|
we do not allow subpackages such as `envoy.service.trace.v2.somethingelse`. |
|
|
|
Minor and patch versions will be implemented in the future, this effort is tracked in |
|
https://github.com/envoyproxy/envoy/issues/8416. |
|
|
|
In everyday discussion and GitHub labels, we refer to the `v2`, `v3`, `vN`, `...` APIs. This has a |
|
specific technical meaning. Any given message in the Envoy API, e.g. the `Bootstrap` at |
|
`envoy.config.bootstrap.v3.Boostrap`, will transitively reference a number of packages in the Envoy |
|
API. These may be at `vN`, `v(N-1)`, etc. The Envoy API is technically a DAG of versioned package |
|
namespaces. When we talk about the `vN xDS API`, we really refer to the `N` of the root |
|
configuration resources (e.g. bootstrap, xDS resources such as `Cluster`). The |
|
v3 API bootstrap configuration is `envoy.config.bootstrap.v3.Boostrap`, even |
|
though it might might transitively reference `envoy.service.trace.v2`. |
|
|
|
# Backwards compatibility |
|
|
|
In general, within a package's major API version, we do not allow any breaking changes. The guiding |
|
principle is that neither the wire format nor protobuf compiler generated language bindings should |
|
experience a backward compatible break on a change. Specifically: |
|
|
|
* Fields should not be renumbered or have their types changed. This is standard proto development |
|
procedure. |
|
|
|
* Renaming of fields or package namespaces for a proto must not occur. This is inherently dangerous, |
|
since: |
|
* Field renames break wire compatibility. This is stricter than standard proto development |
|
procedure in the sense that it does not break binary wire format. However, it **does** break |
|
loading of YAML/JSON into protos as well as text protos. Since we consider YAML/JSON to be first |
|
class inputs, we must not change field names. |
|
|
|
* For service definitions, the gRPC endpoint URL is inferred from package namespace, so this will |
|
break client/server communication. |
|
|
|
* For a message embedded in an `Any` object, the type URL, which the package namespace is a part |
|
of, may be used by Envoy or other API consuming code. Currently, this applies to the top-level |
|
resources embedded in `DiscoveryResponse` objects, e.g. `Cluster`, `Listener`, etc. |
|
|
|
* Consuming code will break and require source code changes to match the API changes. |
|
|
|
* Some other changes are considered breaking for Envoy APIs that are usually considered safe in |
|
terms of protobuf wire compatibility: |
|
* Upgrading a singleton field to a repeated, e.g. `uint32 foo = 1;` to `repeated uint32 foo = 1`. |
|
This changes the JSON wire representation and hence is considered a breaking change. |
|
|
|
* Wrapping an existing field with `oneof`. This has no protobuf or JSON/YAML wire implications, |
|
but is disruptive to various consuming stubs in languages such as Go, creating unnecessary |
|
churn. |
|
|
|
* Increasing the strictness of |
|
[protoc-gen-validate](https://github.com/envoyproxy/protoc-gen-validate) annotations. Exceptions |
|
may be granted for scenarios in which these stricter conditions model behavior already implied |
|
structurally or by documentation. |
|
|
|
The exception to the above policy is for API versions tagged `vNalpha`. Within an alpha major |
|
version, arbitrary breaking changes are allowed. |
|
|
|
Note that changes to default values for wrapped types, e.g. `google.protobuf.UInt32Value` are not |
|
governed by the above policy. Any management server requiring stability across Envoy API or |
|
implementations within a major version should set explicit values for these fields. |
|
|
|
# API lifecycle |
|
|
|
The API lifecycle follows a calendar clock. At the end of Q4 each year, a major API version |
|
increment may occur for any Envoy API package, in concert with the quarterly Envoy release. |
|
|
|
Envoy will support at most three major versions of any API package at all times: |
|
* The current stable major version, e.g. v3. |
|
* The previous stable major version, e.g. v2. This is needed to ensure that we provide at least 1 |
|
year for a supported major version to sunset. By supporting two stable major versions |
|
simultaneously, this makes it easier to coordinate control plane and Envoy |
|
rollouts as well. This previous stable major version will be supported for 1 |
|
year after the introduction of the new current stable major version. |
|
* Optionally, the next experimental alpha major version, e.g. v4alpha. This is a release candidate |
|
for the next stable major version. This is only generated when the current stable major version |
|
requires a breaking change at the next cycle, e.g. a deprecation or field rename. This release |
|
candidate is mechanically generated via the |
|
[protoxform](https://github.com/envoyproxy/envoy/tree/master/tools/protoxform) tool from the |
|
current stable major version, making use of annotations such as `deprecated = true`. This is not a |
|
human editable artifact. |
|
|
|
An example of how this might play out is that at the end of September in 2020, we will freeze |
|
`envoy.config.bootstrap.v4alpha` and this package will become the current stable major version |
|
`envoy.config.bootstrap.v4`. The `envoy.config.bootstrap.v3` package will become the previous stable |
|
major version and support for `envoy.config.bootstrap.v2` will be dropped from the Envoy |
|
implementation. Note that some transitively referenced package, e.g. |
|
`envoy.config.filter.network.foo.v2` may remain at version 2 during this release, if no changes were |
|
made to the referenced package. |
|
|
|
The implication of this API lifecycle and clock is that any deprecated feature in the Envoy API will retain |
|
implementation support for 1-2 years (1.5 years on average). |
|
|
|
# New API features |
|
|
|
The Envoy APIs can be [safely extended](https://cloud.google.com/apis/design/compatibility) with new |
|
packages, messages, enums, fields and enum values, while maintaining [backwards |
|
compatibility](#backwards-compatibility). Additions to the API for a given package should normally |
|
only be made to the *current stable major version*. The rationale for this policy is that: |
|
* The feature is immediately available to Envoy users who consume the current stable major version. |
|
This would not be the case if the feature was placed in `vNalpha`. |
|
* `vNalpha` can be mechanically generated from `vN` without requiring developers to maintain the new |
|
feature in both locations. |
|
* We encourage Envoy users to move to the current stable major version from the previous one to |
|
consume new functionality. |
|
|
|
# When can an API change be made to a package's previous stable major version? |
|
|
|
As a pragmatic concession, we allow API feature additions to the previous stable major version for a |
|
single quarter following a major API version increment. Any changes to the previous stable major |
|
version must be manually reflected in a consistent manner in the current stable major version as |
|
well. |
|
|
|
# How to make a breaking change across major versions |
|
|
|
We maintain [backwards compatibility](#backwards-compatibility) within a major version but allow |
|
breaking changes across major versions. This enables API deprecations, cleanups, refactoring and |
|
reorganization. The Envoy APIs have a stylized workflow for achieving this. There are two prescribed |
|
methods, depending on whether the change is mechanical or manual. |
|
|
|
## Mechanical breaking changes |
|
|
|
Field deprecations, renames, etc. are mechanical changes that are supported by the |
|
[protoxform](https://github.com/envoyproxy/envoy/tree/master/tools/protoxform) tool. These are |
|
guided by [annotations](STYLE.md#api-annotations). |
|
|
|
## Manual breaking changes |
|
|
|
A manual breaking change is distinct from the mechanical changes such as field deprecation, since in |
|
general it requires new code and tests to be implemented in Envoy by hand. For example, if a developer |
|
wants to unify `HeaderMatcher` with `StringMatcher` in the route configuration, this is a likely |
|
candidate for this class of change. The following steps are required: |
|
1. The new version of the feature, e.g. the `NewHeaderMatcher` message should be added, together |
|
with referencing fields, in the current stable major version for the route configuration proto. |
|
2. The Envoy implementation should be changed to consume configuration from the fields added in (1). |
|
Translation code (and tests) should be written to map from the existing field and messages to |
|
(1). |
|
3. The old message/enum/field/enum value should be annotated as deprecated. |
|
4. At the next major version, `protoxform` will remove the deprecated version automatically. |
|
|
|
This approach ensures that API major version releases are predictable and mechanical, and has the |
|
bulk of the Envoy code and test changes owned by feature developers, rather than the API owners. |
|
There will be no major `vN` initiative to address technical debt beyond that enabled by the above |
|
process. |
|
|
|
# One Definition Rule (ODR) |
|
|
|
To avoid maintaining more than two stable major versions of a package, and to cope with diamond |
|
dependency, we add a restriction on how packages may be referenced transitively; a package may have |
|
at most one version of another package in its transitive dependency set. This implies that some |
|
packages will have a major version bump during a release cycle simply to allow them to catch up to |
|
the current stable version of their dependencies. |
|
|
|
Some of this complexity and churn can be avoided by having strict rules on how packages may |
|
reference each other. Package organization and `BUILD` visibility constraints should be used |
|
restrictions to maintain a shallow depth in the dependency tree for any given package. |
|
|
|
# Minimizing the impact of churn |
|
|
|
In addition to stability, the API versioning policy has an explicit goal of minimizing the developer |
|
overhead for the Envoy community, other clients of the APIs (e.g. gRPC), management server vendors |
|
and the wider API tooling ecosystem. A certain amount of API churn between major versions is |
|
desirable to reduce technical debt and to support API evolution, but too much creates costs and |
|
barriers to upgrade. |
|
|
|
We consider deprecations to be *mandatory changes*. Any deprecation will be removed at the next |
|
stable API version. |
|
|
|
Other mechanical breaking changes are considered *discretionary*. These include changes such as |
|
field renames and are largely reflected in protobuf comments. The `protoxform` tool may decide to |
|
minimize API churn by deferring application of discretionary changes until a major version cycle |
|
where the respective message is undergoing a mandatory change. |
|
|
|
The Envoy API structure helps with minimizing churn between versions. Developers should architect |
|
and split packages such that high churn protos, e.g. HTTP connection manager, are isolated in |
|
packages and have a shallow reference hierarchy.
|
|
|