feat: bump go to 1.24.0

[kruskall]

What does this PR do?

bump go to 1.24.0

Why is it important?

should help with fips among other things

Checklist

• I have read and understood the pull request guidelines of this project.
• My code follows the style guidelines of this project
• I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
• I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
• I have made corresponding change to the default configuration files
• I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works
• I have added an entry in ./changelog/fragments using the changelog tool
• I have added an integration test or an E2E test

Disruptive User Impact

How to test this PR locally

Related issues

Questions to ask yourself

• How are we going to support this in production?
• How are we going to measure its adoption?
• How are we going to debug this?
• What are the metrics I should take care of?
• ...

[mergify]

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

• backport-./d./d is the label that automatically backports to the 8./d branch. /d is the digit
• backport-active-all is the label that automatically backports to all active branches.
• backport-active-8 is the label that automatically backports to all active minor branches for the 8 major.
• backport-active-9 is the label that automatically backports to all active minor branches for the 9 major.

[cmacknz]

Thanks! Set the backport 8.x label so that 9.1.0 and 8.19 will both release with Go 1.24.

[pkoutsovasilis]

I would like first the PR that adds the container packaging step in the CI and then merge this PR if our CI is green. Sorry for the delay

cc @dliappis

[dliappis]

I would like first the PR that adds the container packaging step in the CI and then merge this PR if our CI is green. Sorry for the delay

cc @dliappis

Agreed. I'd like to tread carefully here, and I don't see a pressing need to go to 1.24.0 right now since 1.23 is still supported.

[kruskall]

Agreed. I'd like to tread carefully here, and I don't see a pressing need to go to 1.24.0 right now since 1.23 is still supported.

This is true but 1.24 makes it a lot easier to test/prepare for fips compliance 🙂

I'd prefer not to delay this too much, (I'm also happy to tackle any required issue).

[jlind23]

@dliappis @kruskall anything else than the eng prod review missing here? I can see that Craig approved and CI is green.

[dliappis]

@dliappis @kruskall anything else than the eng prod review missing here? I can see that Craig approved and CI is green.

Quality is paramount and don't want to land in a situation like #6948 where PR passed, but subsequent packaging jobs failed.

I'd prefer not merging until we are sure that CI has the additional coverage mentioned in the linked issue above.

[simitt]

We are really eager to get the update to go-1.24 in for easier handling with the FIPS work. But I agree we should have a high confidence level. @dliappis, are you referring to https://github.com/elastic/ingest-dev/issues/5115? Anything that we can help drive forward so that this PR can be driven forward?

I would like first the PR that adds the container packaging step in the CI and then merge this PR if our CI is green.

@pkoutsovasilis which PR or issue are you referring to?

[pkoutsovasilis]

I would like first the PR that adds the container packaging step in the CI and then merge this PR if our CI is green.

@pkoutsovasilis which PR or issue are you referring to?

@simitt I can assure you that everybody wants to see this PR merged ASAP and everyone understands the critically of go 1.24 for FIPS. That said, this PR is currently missing but it is being worked on, so we can introduce go 1.24 with confidence that we won't run into any similar issue as we did for go 1.23 (#6948) 🙂

[simitt]

@pkoutsovasilis thanks for linking the PR! My comment was not to create more pressure, I was simply not sure which PR is considered a precondition. The go.1.24 update will make certain things easier, but it is not currently blocking us, so I fully agree with stabilizing things first and having a good confidence level.

[swiatekm]

Packaging tests are failing because we're using the 1.23 crossbuild image to build the fips docker image. I'm guessing we missed a Go version update somewhere?

[elastic-sonarqube]

Quality Gate passed

Issues
0 New issues
0 Fixed issues
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
No data about Coverage
0.0% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarQube

[elasticmachine]

💚 Build Succeeded

• Buildkite Build
• Commit: d42b00c

History

• 💔 Build #17858 failed c50a7b6

cc @kruskall