[WIP] loosen protobuf version constraints

[cburroughs]

[force version for tests]

Signed-off-by: Chris Burroughs chris.burroughs@gmail.com

What this PR does / why we need it:

Which issue(s) this PR fixes:

Fixes #

[feast-ci-bot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: cburroughs
To complete the pull request process, please assign woop after the PR has been reviewed.
You can assign the PR to them by writing /assign @woop in a comment when ready.

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• OWNERS

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

[achals]

/ok-to-test

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

Merging #3095 (d732f10) into master (9f221e6) will decrease coverage by 8.84%.
The diff coverage is n/a.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #3095      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   67.12%   58.27%   -8.85%     
==========================================
  Files         173      207      +34     
  Lines       15110    17016    +1906     
==========================================
- Hits        10142     9916     -226     
- Misses       4968     7100    +2132     

Flag	Coverage Δ
integrationtests	?
unittests	58.27% <ø> (?)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
setup.py	0.00% <ø> (ø)
...sts/integration/registration/test_universal_cli.py	20.20% <0.00%> (-79.80%)	⬇️
...ts/integration/offline_store/test_offline_write.py	26.08% <0.00%> (-73.92%)	⬇️
...fline_store/test_universal_historical_retrieval.py	28.75% <0.00%> (-71.25%)	⬇️
...ests/integration/e2e/test_python_feature_server.py	29.50% <0.00%> (-70.50%)	⬇️
...dk/python/tests/integration/e2e/test_validation.py	27.55% <0.00%> (-69.30%)	⬇️
...s/integration/registration/test_universal_types.py	32.25% <0.00%> (-67.75%)	⬇️
sdk/python/feast/infra/online_stores/redis.py	28.39% <0.00%> (-66.67%)	⬇️
sdk/python/tests/integration/e2e/test_usage_e2e.py	33.87% <0.00%> (-66.13%)	⬇️
sdk/python/tests/data/data_creator.py	34.78% <0.00%> (-65.22%)	⬇️
... and 157 more

Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here.

[kevjumba]

@cburroughs Hey Chris! Why are you pinning the protobuf version? This seems to do the opposite of what your pr title is describing.

[kevjumba]

@cburroughs Hey Chris! Why are you pinning the protobuf version? This seems to do the opposite of what your pr title is describing.

Also, on that front, I think our general motto is to not pin critical packages to specific versions unless absolutely necessary. I'm going to close this pr. Please feel free to reopen with a specific issue that you want resolved.

[achals]

I believe the pin was for testing. @cburroughs mentioned this in the community call/slack a couple of days ago.

[cburroughs]

On 2022-08-18 13:46, Kevin Zhang wrote: @cburroughs Hey Chris! Why are you pinning the protobuf version? This seems to do the opposite of what your pr title is describing.

Hi! This is my first time trying to do something with the feast codebase and protobuf version have a strong 'here be dragons' vibe. As I understand it there is specific code (#2484) that interacts with version 3.20.0+. My rough plan was to: * Verify that with 3.19, some tests fail. * Modify code to work with <3.19 and >3.19. * Verify tests pass with both. That might not be viable, or maybe tensorflow and friends will update their protobuf version faster and render this line of inquiry obsolete. This PR was currently on the first step (and not yet successful as I didn't understand the interaction between the versions in setup.py and the .txt files).

[felixwang9817]

@cburroughs I think #3103 actually resolves your issue?

[cburroughs]

@cburroughs I think #3103 actually resolves your issue?

Fantastic! Thank you.