[2025-01-16] Bump dependency updates identified by dependabot

[henrybear327]

Please read https://github.com/etcd-io/etcd/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md#contribution-flow.

This pull request completes this week's etcd dependency updates following our dependency roster and dependency management instructions.

Summary of actions

Bumped

• build(deps): bump github.com/google/yamlfmt from 0.14.0 to 0.15.0 in /tools/mod #19186
• build(deps): bump google.golang.org/grpc from 1.69.2 to 1.69.4 #19185
• build(deps): bump google.golang.org/protobuf from 1.36.1 to 1.36.2 #19184
• build(deps): bump go.opentelemetry.io/proto/otlp from 1.4.0 to 1.5.0 #19182

Fully indirect

• build(deps): bump github.com/mattn/go-colorable from 0.1.13 to 0.1.14 #19183

Please read https://github.com/etcd-io/etcd/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md#contribution-flow.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 68.84%. Comparing base (ab819b5) to head (b338550).
Report is 5 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

see 19 files with indirect coverage changes

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main   #19209   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   68.84%   68.84%           
=======================================
  Files         420      420           
  Lines       35635    35635           
=======================================
  Hits        24533    24533           
- Misses       9686     9692    +6     
+ Partials     1416     1410    -6     

---

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 ab819b5...b338550. Read the comment docs.

[henrybear327]

/retest

[henrybear327]

/retest

[henrybear327]

/retest

[ivanvc]

@henrybear327, I think there's a genuine issue with the robustness tests (it happened here, too: #19105 (comment))

[henrybear327]

@henrybear327, I think there's a genuine issue with the robustness tests (it happened here, too: #19105 (comment))

Will dig into the logs and see if there is anything of interest going on. Last week it was fine though.

[ahrtr]

@henrybear327, I think there's a genuine issue with the robustness tests (it happened here, too: #19105 (comment))

Some test were timedout , it looks like the test environment issue. I noticed that the test infra isn't stable recently. Did you notice any known issue of the test infra recently? @ivanvc

Some test were failed, but I did not see any obvious error or failure in the test. It's weird, we may need to enhance the robustness test itself. For example, in here, there are 11 rounds of test for some test case, the first round always failed, but I do not see any error or failure in the first round. cc @serathius

[ahrtr]

/retest

[ahrtr]

LGTM

@ivanvc @jmhbnz PTAL, thx

[k8s-ci-robot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: ahrtr, henrybear327

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

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• OWNERS [ahrtr]

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