chore: group tools/mod updates and update only direct dependencies

[mmorel-35]

Concerning tools update it seems more appropriate to update only direct dependencies.
They can also be grouped in one PR update.

[k8s-ci-robot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: mmorel-35
Once this PR has been reviewed and has the lgtm label, please assign ivanvc for approval. For more information see the Kubernetes Code Review Process.

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

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• .github/OWNERS

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

[k8s-ci-robot]

Hi @mmorel-35. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a etcd-io member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with /ok-to-test on its own line. Until that is done, I will not automatically test new commits in this PR, but the usual testing commands by org members will still work. Regular contributors should join the org to skip this step.

Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the ok-to-test label.

I understand the commands that are listed here.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 68.80%. Comparing base (b038739) to head (d5b952d).
Report is 14 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

see 26 files with indirect coverage changes

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main   #18992      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   68.82%   68.80%   -0.03%     
==========================================
  Files         420      420              
  Lines       35621    35623       +2     
==========================================
- Hits        24517    24509       -8     
- Misses       9683     9691       +8     
- Partials     1421     1423       +2     

---

Continue to review full report in Codecov by Sentry.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update b038739...d5b952d. Read the comment docs.

[ahrtr]

/ok-to-test

[mmorel-35]

/test pull-etcd-integration-1-cpu-amd64

[jmhbnz]

This seems reasonable to me, most of our purely indirect dependencies come from tools so we end up closing them. Thanks for proposing it @mmorel-35, it should reduce weekly spam pr's. What do you think @ivanvc?

[ivanvc]

I think this PR has some overlap with the work from issue #18925.

That aside, I tested it in my fork, and it seems like dependabot is tidying the module correctly (ivanvc#450), as there is only a single directory specified (it looks like the tidying bug is only present when there is more than one directory specified).

The only potential risk I see is that if we have a dependency in /tools/mod that is also used in other submodule (i.e., github.com/gogo/protobuf, go.etcd.io/raft/v3, github.com/grpc-ecosystem/grpc-gateway/v2), our CI check pull-etcd-verify (verify-dep), will fail because the dependencies won't be at the same version.

[ivanvc]

An alternative would be first to merge the manual updates (including updating /tools/mod dependencies that are used in other modules). Then, wait for dependabot to update the grouped pull request. Finally, we could merge the grouped /tools/mod PR.

Even though it can be an alternative, it may not be viable (as just writing the steps in the previous paragraph took me a while to ensure I got it right). This alternative could also be potentially confusing, and instead of decreasing the toil, it could possibly increase it 😅... But I'm trying to think of alternatives to make this work.

[ivanvc]

So, I'm in favor of keeping dependency-type: direct but dropping the group. What do you think, @jmhbnz?

It reduces the spam (and somewhat minimizes the toil), but we'll need to keep the manual process as is.

[jmhbnz]

Sounds good to me, let's go with just the dependency-type: direct for this pr @mmorel-35.

[ivanvc]

Link to #18925.

[k8s-ci-robot]

@mmorel-35: The following test failed, say /retest to rerun all failed tests or /retest-required to rerun all mandatory failed tests:

Test name	Commit	Details	Required	Rerun command
pull-etcd-verify	d5b952d	link	true	/test pull-etcd-verify

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. Please help us cut down on flakes by linking to an open issue when you hit one in your PR.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository. I understand the commands that are listed here.