fix: update out-of-date google-protobuf-any

[xuan-cao-swi]

Closes: #1814

This issue won't cause any major breakdown since it's only for logging the error message.

If the change is valid, then it needs to be updated for all exporters.

[kaylareopelle]

Do we need to update the min version of the protobuf dependencies for the gems too?

[xuan-cao-swi]

Do we need to update the min version of the protobuf dependencies for the gems too?

I'm not very familiar with protobuf but I can share what I found:

I don't think we need to update protobuf dependencies (well_known_types.rb file's last commit is 2 years ago); I think that's just an edge case that was missed.

By looking at the well_known_types.rb, it seems like we can access type_name ? But strangely it returns no method when access it.

The type_name seems also derived from type_url (e.g. type_url split), so I think it's safe to use type_url split in our implementation.

[github-actions]

👋 This pull request has been marked as stale because it has been open with no activity. You can: comment on the issue or remove the stale label to hold stale off for a while, add the keep label to hold stale off permanently, or do nothing. If you do nothing this pull request will be closed eventually by the stale bot

[kaylareopelle]

Hi @xuan-cao-swi, coming back to this one. I think this is a good change. Would you mind adding a regression test?

[xuan-cao-swi]

Hi @kaylareopelle, I think this test cover the case; but I still add one test case that parse the request from raw byte.

I still couldn't figure out why this type_name is missing, so I asked on protobuf repo.

FYI, our current test case use protobuf 3.25, but latest one is 4.30.

[kaylareopelle]

Hi @kaylareopelle, I think this test cover the case; but I still add one test case that parse the request from raw byte.

I still couldn't figure out why this type_name is missing, so I asked on protobuf repo.

FYI, our current test case use protobuf 3.25, but latest one is 4.30.

Thank you and thanks for raising the issue! I think it would be helpful to start testing using newer versions of protobuf. I created a PR to do this, but it fell down in priority and I couldn't see it through to the end. Feel free to open one if you have the bandwidth!