We read every piece of feedback, and take your input very seriously.
To see all available qualifiers, see our documentation.
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
Coming from #551 (comment)
The build.gradle file is getting big and confusing to navigate.
build.gradle
Change our BWC setup (derived from AD and ML Commons setup) to the Security repo pattern.
See https://github.com/opensearch-project/security/blob/main/bwc-test/build.gradle
Leave it as is, to reduce a lot of the duplication that will be required.
Refactor to a completely different model as some other plugins are doing.
It took several hours to get this working. I don't expect this will be a trivial exercise to move it.
Other possibilities mentioned in #551 review:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
KNN also has a good example of separating rolling and restart upgrade somewhere else: https://github.com/opensearch-project/k-NN/blob/2.x/qa/rolling-upgrade/build.gradle
Sorry, something went wrong.
No branches or pull requests
Coming from #551 (comment)
Is your feature request related to a problem?
The
build.gradle
file is getting big and confusing to navigate.What solution would you like?
Change our BWC setup (derived from AD and ML Commons setup) to the Security repo pattern.
See https://github.com/opensearch-project/security/blob/main/bwc-test/build.gradle
What alternatives have you considered?
Leave it as is, to reduce a lot of the duplication that will be required.
Refactor to a completely different model as some other plugins are doing.
Do you have any additional context?
It took several hours to get this working. I don't expect this will be a trivial exercise to move it.
Other possibilities mentioned in #551 review:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: