Skip to content

Upgrade to Protobuf 35.1#12876

Open
shivaspeaks wants to merge 9 commits into
grpc:masterfrom
shivaspeaks:protobuf-upgrade
Open

Upgrade to Protobuf 35.1#12876
shivaspeaks wants to merge 9 commits into
grpc:masterfrom
shivaspeaks:protobuf-upgrade

Conversation

@shivaspeaks

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Per https://github.com/protocolbuffers/protobuf/releases

okshiva@okshiva-mac2 grpc-java % curl -sL https://github.com/protocolbuffers/protobuf/releases/download/v35.1/protobuf-35.1.tar.gz | shasum -a 256

f0b6838e7522a8da96126d487068c959bc624926368f3024ac8fd03abd0a1ac4

@shivaspeaks

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

Note:
While upgrading Protobuf to 35.1, two secondary Bazel dependencies (rules_proto and rules_android) had to be addressed to keep the CI green. Here is the context:

  1. Added rules_proto to repositories.bzl and MODULE.bazel.
    The googleapis dependency requires rules_proto to build. During the CI job (--enable_bzlmod=false), the build failed during the analysis phase because googleapis could no longer implicitly fetch rules_proto via Protobuf.

  2. Upgraded to rules_android v0.7.3
    Previous version of rules_android (v0.7.2) explicitly hardcoded "com.google.protobuf:protobuf-java:4.33.4" in its internal maven artifacts. During the Android CI job, Bazel used our newly upgraded 35.1 compiler to generate internal Android resource files (gencode 4.35.1). However, because rules_android's internal tools (like ResourceProcessorBusyBox) were locked to the 4.33.4 runtime, it triggered a ProtobufRuntimeVersionException (poison pill).

@shivaspeaks shivaspeaks requested a review from ejona86 June 22, 2026 09:46

@ejona86 ejona86 left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

When merging, the "two secondary Bazel dependencies" note needs to be included in the commit message. That is relevant for the history of why the changes in the commit were done; it shouldn't be limited to the review.

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.

2 participants