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

[BWC] How should Backwards Compatiabilty tests be configured as we approach v3.0? #167

Closed
peternied opened this issue Sep 26, 2022 · 2 comments
Labels
question Further information is requested untriaged v3.0.0

Comments

@peternied
Copy link
Member

Following up from the conversation in opensearch-project/OpenSearch#3615

As we are building OpenSearch v3.0 we don't really have a backwards compatibility story with version 2.X. While I understand this story is still coming together, what should plugin teams do that use BWC tests as part of their PR checks?

In Security, we have been blocked from migrating to v3.0 because of this issue, but I feel this is slowing our velocity too much on part of the product that isn't addressed until later in the lifecycle. I am disabling these tests to keep us agile, but I feel like this is going to delay dealing with these problems until later. What do others think, how should we handle this?

@dblock
Copy link
Member

dblock commented Sep 27, 2022

We have a bcw story with 2.x, only the last 2.x will be directly upgradable to 3.0.

I fixed this for job-scheduler here: opensearch-project/job-scheduler#242 as part of making it work against 3.0 core.

Is there something else needed?

@peternied
Copy link
Member Author

peternied commented Sep 27, 2022

Thanks for getting that change in for job-scheduler. I'll rerun the suite and confirm we are OK to test the 2.4 -> 3.0 workflow, in which case there is no action we need to take. https://github.com/peternied/security/actions/runs/3139197099/jobs/5099360691

Assuming this passes, I'll close this issue

only the last 2.x

This is a soft concept, once the end of the 2.x line is declared having a mechanism to propagate it and lift/ensure everyone to v3.0 would be of value.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
question Further information is requested untriaged v3.0.0
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants