Remove the go-kit dependency #3139
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Contributor
|
Thanks for the contribution. @fulghum will look at this today. |
fulghum
reviewed
Aug 8, 2025
fulghum
approved these changes
Aug 8, 2025
Contributor
fulghum
left a comment
fulghum
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks for the contribution @alecsammon! 🙏 Always nice to drop a dependency, especially one that is not actively maintained.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
4 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This library depends on https://github.com/go-kit/kit.
It looks to only use this for this single package: https://github.com/go-kit/kit/blob/master/metrics/discard/discard.go
Although the usage of this package is safe, the
go-kitlibrary hasn't been maintained since 2023 - and is throwing some warnings in our security scanning.Can we look at removing usage of this external library?
The proposed PR replaces it with an internal interface - but also allows configuration via a config options.
Alternatively it could maybe be dropped completely? It's only a no-op.