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.

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

Deprecate BoolQueryBuilder's mustNot field #53125

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Mar 6, 2020

Conversation

romseygeek
Copy link
Contributor

The bool query builder in elasticsearch accepts both must_not and mustNot
fields. Given that leniency is abhorrent and must be eschewed, we should deprecate
the latter as it doesn't fit with the style of parameters elsewhere in the DSL.

@romseygeek romseygeek added :Search/Search Search-related issues that do not fall into other categories >deprecation v8.0.0 v7.7.0 labels Mar 4, 2020
@romseygeek romseygeek self-assigned this Mar 4, 2020
@elasticmachine
Copy link
Collaborator

Pinging @elastic/es-search (:Search/Search)

@romseygeek
Copy link
Contributor Author

@elasticmachine update branch

Copy link
Contributor

@jtibshirani jtibshirani left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This looks good to me, great to clean this up!

@romseygeek romseygeek merged commit 9782e70 into elastic:master Mar 6, 2020
@romseygeek romseygeek deleted the deprecations/bool-mustNot branch March 6, 2020 09:11
romseygeek added a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 6, 2020
The bool query builder in elasticsearch accepts both must_not and mustNot
fields. Given that leniency is abhorrent and must be eschewed, we should deprecate
the latter as it doesn't fit with the style of parameters elsewhere in the DSL.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
>deprecation :Search/Search Search-related issues that do not fall into other categories v7.7.0 v8.0.0-alpha1
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants