Pinging @elastic/integrations (Team:Integrations)

This pull request is now in conflicts. Could you fix it? 🙏
To fixup this pull request, you can check out it locally. See documentation: https://help.github.com/articles/checking-out-pull-requests-locally/

git fetch upstream
git checkout -b test_prom_upgrade upstream/test_prom_upgrade
git merge upstream/master
git push upstream test_prom_upgrade

💔 Build Failed

the below badges are clickable and redirect to their specific view in the CI or DOCS

Steps errors

❕ Flaky test report

No test was executed to be analysed.

🤖 GitHub comments

To re-run your PR in the CI, just comment with:

• /test : Re-trigger the build.

• /package : Generate the packages and run the E2E tests.

• /beats-tester : Run the installation tests with beats-tester.

Currently waiting for #28028 as described at #28023 (comment).

cc: @premendrasingh @vjsamuel

It is weird that updating prometheus requires so many changes, including so many projects that need overrides in the license checker. But well, if this is needed, it LGTM, pinging some more people for awareness of these changes.

It seems weird to me too :). It's also weird why the licence-checker could not identify the licences in so many libraries but it's most probably because in some projects the licence is not in the proper format. For example the licence of github.com/ajstarks/svgo (https://github.com/ajstarks/svgo/blob/master/LICENSE) is not in proper format and hence the tool fails to detect it. See for cross reference a valid one.

cc: @ruflin @masci

This pull request does not have a backport label. Could you fix it @ChrsMark? 🙏
To fixup this pull request, you need to add the backport labels for the needed
branches, such as:

• backport-v./d./d./d is the label to automatically backport to the 7./d branch. /d is the digit

NOTE: backport-skip has been added to this pull request.

It really seems something is off here with the license part. Also for the NOTICE.txt file:

29,726 additions, 9,610 deletions not shown because the diff is too large

We should make sure to understand why this is.

@ruflin I just tried to update the Prometheus library and then the make notice command was failing due to several libs. So I was adding them one by one to make the command succeed. These libraries are dependencies of the prometheus library but because of reasons they cannot be verified by our checker. Reasons could be that we don't have CC-BY-4.0 and CC0-1.0 in our list or because our script cannot detect the license within the LICENCE file (maybe the LICENCE file is not format properly) so I had to manually define it in overrides.json.

Detailed licence checks for libs:

1. github.com/ajstarks/svgo -> CC-BY-4.0
2. github.com/bmizerany/pat -> from README.md
3. github.com/cactus/go-statsd-client/statsd -> MIT
4. github.com/dnaeon/go-vcr -> BSD-2-Clause
5. github.com/golang/freetype -> GPL-2.0
6. github.com/hudl/fargo -> [MIT] from README.md
7. github.com/influxdata/line-protocol -> MIT
8. github.com/lightstep/lightstep-tracer-common/golang/gogo -> MIT
9. github.com/pascaldekloe/goe -> CC0-1.0
10. github.com/streadway/handy -> [BSD 2-Clause ] from README.md
11. gonum.org/v1/plot -> BSD-3-Clause

Thanks for the detailed investigation into the license part.

For the diff on the version that are updated: I have the suspicion many of these are not directly related to prometheus but got updated to the most recent version. We should update these libs but not as part of this PR. Ideally we would have update the libs already in the past.

What I suggest is that we do several smaller PR's. 1 for updating the cloud.google.com/*, one for github.com/Azure, one for aws etc.. If we do this and one of the libs has an issue, rolling back will be simple and easy to trace when the change happened. Ideally each "owner" of the projects that use these libs could open the PR itself. But likely it is faster if you quickly take care of it @ChrsMark and do it for them.

There is a chance that everything is connected and depends on each other and then we need to do it all at once, but I strongly hope this is not the case.

This pull request is now in conflicts. Could you fix it? 🙏
To fixup this pull request, you can check out it locally. See documentation: https://help.github.com/articles/checking-out-pull-requests-locally/

git fetch upstream
git checkout -b test_prom_upgrade upstream/test_prom_upgrade
git merge upstream/master
git push upstream test_prom_upgrade

@ruflin thanks for your feedback here! I agree with your suggestions to split the upgrades into smaller chunks.

github.com/Azure: we have already #28028 by @narph . ✅
github.com/Microsoft/go-winio @narph could you take care of it too?. PR: #28464 ✅
k8s: I will do the upgrade. PR: #28228 ✅
cloud.google.com/go : @sayden @endorama could take care of this upgrade?, PR: #28229 ✅
github.com/aws: @kaiyan-sheng @aspacca could you take this please?, PR: #28236 ✅

I can create a different meta issue for this if you prefer or we can keep using this issue as reference. I prefer keep using this one to avoid the extra overhead :).

@ChrsMark Thanks for putting this together. Lets keep it here. Seems like we already made quite a big of progress!

Continuing at #28716