Conversation
![chatgpt-codex-connector[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/1144995?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 9ebac3582e
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Codex has been enabled to automatically review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
When you sign up for Codex through ChatGPT, Codex can also answer questions or update the PR, like "@codex address that feedback".
| // - For strategic-merge and merge: a JSON object, e.g. {"spec": {"replicas": 3}} | ||
| // - For json (RFC 6902): a JSON array, e.g. [{"op": "replace", "path": "/spec/replicas", "value": 3}] | ||
| // Uses google.protobuf.Value so protojson deserializes nested JSON natively (no base64). | ||
| google.protobuf.Value patch = 1 [(protoc.gen.jsonschema.field_options).required = true]; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Changing field patch on tag 1 from bytes to google.protobuf.Value introduces a protobuf compatibility break for mixed-version deployments: old senders still encode raw JSON bytes on field 1, but new receivers now decode field 1 as an embedded message and can fail to unmarshal; conversely, new senders emit protobuf-encoded Value bytes that old receivers will treat as raw patch JSON and pass downstream incorrectly. This can break patch_deployment actions during rolling upgrades, so the new representation should use a new field number (or a compatibility oneof) instead of retyping the existing tag.
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
2 participants
What does this PR do?
Changes patch field to google.protobuf.Value to avoid base64
Motivation
Additional Notes
Possible Drawbacks / Trade-offs
Describe how to test/QA your changes
Reviewer's Checklist
Reviewers: please see the review guidelines.