[Backport 2.x] [Refactor] XContent base classes from xcontent to core library (#5902) #6470
Conversation
nknize
requested review from
reta,
anasalkouz,
andrross,
Bukhtawar,
CEHENKLE,
dblock,
gbbafna,
setiah,
kartg,
kotwanikunal,
mch2,
owaiskazi19,
adnapibar,
Rishikesh1159,
ryanbogan,
saratvemulapalli,
shwetathareja,
dreamer-89,
tlfeng,
VachaShah and
xuezhou25
as code owners
Gradle Check (Jenkins) Run Completed with:
|
Codecov Report
📣 This organization is not using Codecov’s GitHub App Integration. We recommend you install it so Codecov can continue to function properly for your repositories. Learn more @@ Coverage Diff @@
## 2.x #6470 +/- ##
============================================
+ Coverage 70.36% 70.38% +0.01%
- Complexity 59197 59261 +64
============================================
Files 4796 4796
Lines 284227 284205 -22
Branches 41304 41305 +1
============================================
+ Hits 200005 200046 +41
+ Misses 67523 67443 -80
- Partials 16699 16716 +17
Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here. |
|
@nknize I would very much like to backport this to avoid major divergence between the branches, but I'm having a hard time squaring this with our compatibility guarantees within a major version. Classes like |
That's fair! Maybe we give it a time limit for feedback so it doesn't get lost indefinitely? |
|
I am afraid this will make lots of people unhappy, even if it's a trivial change. But maybe we can help them by preparing the change for them? @nknize you could use meta with https://github.com/opensearch-project/opensearch-plugins and do a bulk change and submit a PR into each repo. Like so: https://github.com/opensearch-project/project-meta#make-a-change-in-many-repos |
|
Opened #6841 for tracking |
|
I'm going to give this until the evening then merge so downstream folks have the week to make their refactor changes in advance of feature freeze. @reta @andrross @saratvemulapalli are y'all good with this? |
👍 to me, I hope the migration for community plugin developers is going to be straightforward |
Thanks @nknize. I've opened up an RFC for Protobuf[1]. I dont think SDK has concerns, OpenSearch 2.x is SDK 1.x and we should just backport a PR which shouldn't be a problem. Tagging @dbwiddis for thoughts. |
👍🏻 . Plugins already have consumed these changes in 3.0 (a.k.a main) should be a backport to their 2.x branch, it shouldn't be invasive. I am worried for plugins externally which are not part of the project since its a breaking change, communicating is the best thing we could do. |
|
Here's one: #7728 |
nknize
added
the
backport
|
Why is this not mentioned in the changelog? This was a breaking change! |
|
It should have been mentioned in the CHANGELOG. @nknize can you please add it? Regarding whether this was a breaking change in the semver sense, it's not. You can take a deep dependency on just about anything in core, and any change will break anyone that takes such a dependency, including a major upgrade of a dependent library. We ensure that all end-user features (e.g. RESTful interfaces) follow semver, but for java dependencies OpenSearch requires you to rebuild your plugin against every minor version. To solve this in core, @nknize is refactoring such that we can one day declare that |
Backport 9b9158e from #5902