Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Rest layer bwc compatibility post type removal #2296

Closed
Tracked by #1940
dreamer-89 opened this issue Mar 1, 2022 · 4 comments
Closed
Tracked by #1940

Rest layer bwc compatibility post type removal #2296

dreamer-89 opened this issue Mar 1, 2022 · 4 comments
Assignees
@dreamer-89
Labels
backwards-compatibility discuss Issues intended to help drive brainstorming and decision making distributed framework

Comments

@dreamer-89
Copy link
Member

dreamer-89 commented Mar 1, 2022 •
edited
Loading

The idea is to add bwc compatibility post type removal (#1940 ) as it decouples users from client side changes/upgrades with Opensearch upgrades. Adding bwc compatibility here means; keep supporting the deprecated typed end-points and map those end-points to typeless end-points but without guaranteeing the same behavior.
@dreamer-89 dreamer-89 mentioned this issue Mar 1, 2022
Closed
67 tasks
@dreamer-89 dreamer-89 changed the title Add rest layer bwc compatibility Rest layer bwc compatibility post type removal Mar 1, 2022
@dreamer-89 dreamer-89 changed the title Rest layer bwc compatibility post type removal Rest layer bwc compatibility post type removal Mar 1, 2022
@dreamer-89
Copy link
Member Author

@nknize @reta @CEHENKLE : What is your opinion on maintaining rest layer bwc compatibility ?

@reta
Copy link
Collaborator

reta commented Mar 1, 2022

@dreamer-89 I think we should not mimic the API to support bwc compatibility, 2.0 is major release with a number of breaking changes, removing deprecated endpoints is one of those (in my opinion).

@dreamer-89 dreamer-89 self-assigned this Mar 1, 2022
@dreamer-89
Copy link
Member Author

dreamer-89 commented Mar 10, 2022 •
edited
Loading

As per discussion with team and @reta's feedback; the general consensus is not to include API bwc compatibility specifically for type removal. Closing this issue.

@dreamer-89 dreamer-89 added discuss Issues intended to help drive brainstorming and decision making backwards-compatibility distributed framework labels Mar 21, 2022
@dreamer-89
Copy link
Member Author

An issue is identified with OpenSearch 2.0 where elastic/beat client integration broke. As per discussion, rest layer versioning is a required feature and is getting tracked separately in #3035

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees

@dreamer-89 dreamer-89

Labels
backwards-compatibility discuss Issues intended to help drive brainstorming and decision making distributed framework
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
2 participants
@reta @dreamer-89