[libbeeat] add DropFields processor to js API

[mib1185]

What does this PR do?

This will register the drop_fields processor to the JavaScript API as DropFields, so that it can be used in custom js processors like already used to do with AddFields and many more.

Should also be backported to 7.17.

Why is it important?

Checklist

• 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.next.asciidoc or CHANGELOG-developer.next.asciidoc.

Author's Checklist

• [ ]

How to test this PR locally

Related issues

Use cases

Screenshots

Logs

[mergify]

This pull request does not have a backport label.
If this is a bug or security fix, could you label this PR @mib1185? 🙏.
For such, you'll need to label your PR with:

• The upcoming major version of the Elastic Stack
• The upcoming minor version of the Elastic Stack (if you're not pushing a breaking change)

To fixup this pull request, you need to add the backport labels for the needed
branches, such as:

• backport-v8./d.0 is the label to automatically backport to the 8./d branch. /d is the digit

[elasticmachine]

💚 Build Succeeded

the below badges are clickable and redirect to their specific view in the CI or DOCS

Expand to view the summary

Build stats

• Start Time: 2022-12-21T06:36:00.581+0000

• Duration: 76 min 6 sec

Test stats 🧪

Test	Results
Failed	0
Passed	25131
Skipped	1954
Total	27085

💚 Flaky test report

Tests succeeded.

🤖 GitHub comments

Expand to view the GitHub comments

To re-run your PR in the CI, just comment with:

• /test : Re-trigger the build.

• /package : Generate the packages and run the E2E tests.

• /beats-tester : Run the installation tests with beats-tester.

• run elasticsearch-ci/docs : Re-trigger the docs validation. (use unformatted text in the comment!)

[mib1185]

If this is a bug or security fix, could you label this PR @mib1185? 🙏.

@ mergify🤖 : sorry, but I'm not allowed to add labels in this repo

[elasticmachine]

Pinging @elastic/elastic-agent-data-plane (Team:Elastic-Agent-Data-Plane)

[belimawr]

@mib1185 would you mind updating this PR with the latest changes on main? You can use the Update branch button here on the PR or do it manually.

[belimawr]

@mib1185 Could you also add a changelog entry?

After that it will be good to merge.

[mib1185]

hi @belimawr
thanks for your review and comments 🙂
Can I add the backport labels, or do you have to do it yourself?

[belimawr]

hi @belimawr thanks for your review and comments slightly_smiling_face Can I add the backport labels, or do you have to do it yourself?

My plan was to skip the backport labels, I saw this PR like an enhancement rather than a bug-fix that should be backported.

Does it make sense to you? Or what are your thoughts on that?

[mib1185]

I agree that this is not a bugfix, but on the other hand it could also be a benefit for users of the 7.17 (like myself) 🙂

[belimawr]

I agree that this is not a bugfix, but on the other hand it could also be a benefit for users of the 7.17 (like myself) slightly_smiling_face

I totally get that, but we can only backport bug fixes to 7.17.

That's a good opportunity for you to upgrade to the latest 8.x release ;)

I see a couple of checks are still failing, could you run:

make notice

From the root of the project and commit any changes?

[cmacknz]

From the root of the project and commit any changes?

Probably the checks will pass after merging the go.mod updates from #33789 to fix CI in beats in general.

[mib1185]

That's a good opportunity for you to upgrade to the latest 8.x release ;)

I totally understand that (and also willed to do), but I'm actually "forced" to use 7.17, because the upstream system is still based on logstash 7.17 which I do not have any chance to change it for now (not under my responsibility) 🙈

I totally get that, but we can only backport bug fixes to 7.17.

Would it be convenient for you, when we say we fix the missing JS API availablity of the drop_fields processor? 😁

I see a couple of checks are still failing, could you run:

make notice

From the root of the project and commit any changes?

will give it a try tomorrow, rebase unfortunately seems not to solve the CI issues 🙁

[belimawr]

will give it a try tomorrow, rebase unfortunately seems not to solve the CI issues

If you don't manage to fix it, I can also give it a shot.

[belimawr]

Would it be convenient for you, when we say we fix the missing JS API availablity of the drop_fields processor?

Nothing prevents you from running your own fork ;).

[mib1185]

will give it a try tomorrow, rebase unfortunately seems not to solve the CI issues

If you don't manage to fix it, I can also give it a shot.

Would be great if you could give it a try 🙂

[mergify]

This pull request is now in conflicts. Could you fix it? 🙏
To fixup this pull request, you can check out it locally. See documentation: https://help.github.com/articles/checking-out-pull-requests-locally/

git fetch upstream
git checkout -b feature-add-dropfields-processor-to-js-api upstream/feature-add-dropfields-processor-to-js-api
git merge upstream/main
git push upstream feature-add-dropfields-processor-to-js-api

[belimawr]

Let's see if the latest changes on main helps CI to be happy

[sonarcloud]

Please retry analysis of this Pull-Request directly on SonarCloud.