Remove net461 target from internal packages #128
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Signed-off-by: Thomas Farr <tsfarr@amazon.com>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Farr <tsfarr@amazon.com>
Xtansia
requested review from
anirudha,
dblock,
joshuali925,
VachaShah,
MaxKsyunz and
Yury-Fridlyand
as code owners
Signed-off-by: Thomas Farr <tsfarr@amazon.com>
dblock
approved these changes
Jan 3, 2023
Yury-Fridlyand
approved these changes
Jan 3, 2023
davidalpert
added a commit
to davidalpert/opensearch-net
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 17, 2023
Further investigation shows that a TermQuery with an empty
string value is expected to be 'conditionless' in this
codebase and the TermQuery implementation includes a
.Verbatim() method to allow the client to serialize
the query clause even though it evaluates to
conditionless
this allows me to create a query like this
GET /index/_search
{
"query": {
"bool": {
"must": [
{"exists": { "field": "last_name"}}
],
"must_not": [
{"term": {"last_name.keyword": {"value": ""}}}
]
}
}
}
using the following syntax
client.Search<SampleDomainObject>(s => s
.Query(q => q
.Bool(b => b
.Must(m => m.Exists(e => e.Field("last_name")))
.MustNot(m => m.Term(t => t.Verbatim().Field("last_name.keyword").Value(string.Empty)))
)
)
.Index("index")
.Source(sfd => null)
);
thus resolving that opensearch-projectGH-281 is not a bug and is working as designed.
Signed-off-by: David Alpert <david@spinthemoose.com>
davidalpert
added a commit
to davidalpert/opensearch-net
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 17, 2023
Further investigation shows that a TermQuery with an empty
string value is expected to be 'conditionless' in this
codebase and the TermQuery implementation includes a
.Verbatim() method to allow the client to serialize
the query clause even though it evaluates to
conditionless
this allows me to create a query like this
GET /index/_search
{
"query": {
"bool": {
"must": [
{"exists": { "field": "last_name"}}
],
"must_not": [
{"term": {"last_name.keyword": {"value": ""}}}
]
}
}
}
using the following syntax
client.Search<SampleDomainObject>(s => s
.Query(q => q
.Bool(b => b
.Must(m => m.Exists(e => e.Field("last_name")))
.MustNot(m => m.Term(t => t.Verbatim().Field("last_name.keyword").Value(string.Empty)))
)
)
.Index("index")
.Source(sfd => null)
);
thus resolving that opensearch-projectGH-281 is not a bug and is working as designed.
Signed-off-by: David Alpert <david@spinthemoose.com>
davidalpert
added a commit
to davidalpert/opensearch-net
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 20, 2023
Further investigation shows that a TermQuery with an empty
string value is expected to be 'conditionless' in this
codebase and the TermQuery implementation includes a
.Verbatim() method to allow the client to serialize
the query clause even though it evaluates to
conditionless
this allows me to create a query like this
GET /index/_search
{
"query": {
"bool": {
"must": [
{"exists": { "field": "last_name"}}
],
"must_not": [
{"term": {"last_name.keyword": {"value": ""}}}
]
}
}
}
using the following syntax
client.Search<SampleDomainObject>(s => s
.Query(q => q
.Bool(b => b
.Must(m => m.Exists(e => e.Field("last_name")))
.MustNot(m => m.Term(t => t.Verbatim().Field("last_name.keyword").Value(string.Empty)))
)
)
.Index("index")
.Source(sfd => null)
);
thus resolving that opensearch-projectGH-281 is not a bug and is working as designed.
Signed-off-by: David Alpert <david@spinthemoose.com>
Xtansia
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 14, 2023
… ignored as "conditionless" (#283) * test: reproduce GH-281 TermQuery with Value of empty string serializes as <null> Signed-off-by: David Alpert <david@spinthemoose.com> * test: demonstrate GH-128 is a feature, not a bug Further investigation shows that a TermQuery with an empty string value is expected to be 'conditionless' in this codebase and the TermQuery implementation includes a .Verbatim() method to allow the client to serialize the query clause even though it evaluates to conditionless this allows me to create a query like this GET /index/_search { "query": { "bool": { "must": [ {"exists": { "field": "last_name"}} ], "must_not": [ {"term": {"last_name.keyword": {"value": ""}}} ] } } } using the following syntax client.Search<SampleDomainObject>(s => s .Query(q => q .Bool(b => b .Must(m => m.Exists(e => e.Field("last_name"))) .MustNot(m => m.Term(t => t.Verbatim().Field("last_name.keyword").Value(string.Empty))) ) ) .Index("index") .Source(sfd => null) ); thus resolving that GH-281 is not a bug and is working as designed. Signed-off-by: David Alpert <david@spinthemoose.com> * refactor: address PR feedback GH-281 Signed-off-by: David Alpert <david@spinthemoose.com> * docs: update USAGE.md with an example of IsVerbatim/Verbatim() GH-281 Signed-off-by: David Alpert <david@spinthemoose.com> --------- Signed-off-by: David Alpert <david@spinthemoose.com>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Description
Remove the net461 target from internal packages and update a couple dependencies which have CVEs. The client itself does not depend on these and is unaffected by the CVEs.
By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache 2.0 license.
For more information on following Developer Certificate of Origin and signing off your commits, please check here.