Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

MPL-licensed github.com/hashicorp/go-retryablehttp is not allowed in CNCF #2342

Open
saschagrunert opened this issue Jan 21, 2025 · 3 comments · May be fixed by #2350
Open

MPL-licensed github.com/hashicorp/go-retryablehttp is not allowed in CNCF #2342

saschagrunert opened this issue Jan 21, 2025 · 3 comments · May be fixed by #2350
Labels
enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@saschagrunert
Copy link
Contributor

Hey folks, we (Kubernetes) use the rekor client directly from go in kubernetes-sigs/release-sdk: https://github.com/kubernetes-sigs/release-sdk/blob/83243fb51416adb402fbbb1e611e2861e8e8d008/sign/sign.go#L726

The issue is that GetRekorClient imports go-retryablehttp, which is MPL licensed and therefore not allowed in the CNCF.

Would it be generally possible to switch to an alternative?

Refers to kubernetes-sigs/release-sdk#197

@haydentherapper
Copy link
Contributor

Do you have any suggestions of alternative implementations of a retryable HTTP client?

This might be a bit too in the weeds, but another alternative would be to change how you verify. I saw that you're doing lookups in the log to find a matching entry only for the purpose of knowing if the file is signed. Can you instead persist a log proof locally, removing the need to make online calls during verification? Can you assume that if a signature is provided, the file is signed, and otherwise require a flag to be specified to skip verification?

@kommendorkapten
Copy link
Member

This may be an option https://github.com/avast/retry-go (MIT). But also, implementing a retry for this is not extremely complicated, and bringing down dependencies is always a noble thing IMHO. I may have some cycles next week to take a look at this.

@saschagrunert saschagrunert linked a pull request Jan 29, 2025 that will close this issue
@saschagrunert
Copy link
Contributor Author

I'm working on a solution in #2350

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

3 participants