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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Support Elasticsearch 6.x #19

Merged
merged 8 commits into from
Apr 19, 2018
Merged

Support Elasticsearch 6.x #19

merged 8 commits into from
Apr 19, 2018

Conversation

danielberkompas
Copy link
Owner

Closes #16.

@danielberkompas
Support Elasticsearch 6.x+
a50cf5c 
#16

Removes support for the Elasticsearch 5.x way of doing multiple types
per index and parent/child relationships. This should be fine since
anyone who is still on 5.x should be migrating their data anyway.
@danielberkompas
Respect JSON library configuration setting
d87664c 
In Bulk. Closes #17.
@danielberkompas
Respect :bulk_wait_interval setting
81fa49b
@danielberkompas
[#10] Add regression test
5a5f579 
Fixes #10. This regression test will prevent the error from recurring.
@danielberkompas
Use Elasticsearch 6.2.4 on Travis
a1e4ebb
@danielberkompas
Add upgrading guide for 0.2.x to 0.3.x
32d39a3
@danielberkompas
Add note about Elasticsearch 5.x to README
25e655c
@coveralls
Copy link

coveralls commented Apr 19, 2018 •
edited
Loading

Coverage Status

Coverage increased (+8.1%) to 93.158% when pulling e3b8bd4 on elasticsearch-6 into 91eaed3 on master.

@danielberkompas danielberkompas merged commit bc1f30a into master Apr 19, 2018
@danielberkompas danielberkompas deleted the elasticsearch-6 branch April 19, 2018 20:32
steffkes
steffkes reviewed Apr 20, 2018
View reviewed changes
guides/upgrading/0.2.x_to_0.3.x.md
[join](https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/elasticsearch/reference/6.2/parent-join.html)
field.

To support this, version `0.3.0` of this client library makes some breaking
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

just curious @danielberkompas: my understanding of semver is that breaking changes require a new major version, no? otherwise you're (as a user) going with a minor update (0.2.0 to 0.3.0) and for sure not expecting a breaking changes to be happening.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

ah yes, i realize the same would have been already the case for our changes from 0.1.1 to 0.2.0 - which probably is the reason my patches were all based on the former, because it's no simple upgrade.

Copy link
Owner Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Semver rules regarding major versions and breaking changes only kick in after you have reached 1.0.0. Anything < 1.0.0 is considered a beta version which can include breaking changes.

  1. Major version zero (0.y.z) is for initial development. Anything may change at any time. The public API should not be considered stable.

— Semver.org

Only after you reach 1.0.0 are you required to have a commitment to stability on major versions.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

again something learned today, thanks for the pointer!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@steffkes steffkes steffkes left review comments

@zberkom zberkom zberkom approved these changes

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet
4 participants
@danielberkompas @coveralls @steffkes @zberkom