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

Fixing xcontent imports #410

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Mar 29, 2023
Merged

Fixing xcontent imports #410

merged 2 commits into from
Mar 29, 2023

Conversation

khushbr
Copy link
Collaborator

@khushbr khushbr commented Mar 28, 2023

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please provide an existing Issue # , or describe.
Fixing the xcontent imports to handle the OpenSearch core refactoring change for XContent
Issue: #406

Describe the solution you are proposing
Fixing the XContent Import in code for 2.x

Check List

  • [ y] New functionality includes testing.
    • [ y] All tests pass
  • [N/A] New functionality has been documented.
    • [ N/A] New functionality has javadoc added
  • [ y] Commits are signed per the DCO using --signoff

By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache 2.0 license.
For more information on following Developer Certificate of Origin and signing off your commits, please check here.

Signed-off-by: Khushboo Rajput <[email protected]>
@khushbr khushbr requested a review from a team March 28, 2023 23:20
dzane17
dzane17 previously approved these changes Mar 28, 2023
@dzane17
Copy link
Contributor

dzane17 commented Mar 28, 2023

Some UTs failing?

import org.opensearch.common.xcontent.XContentHelper;
import org.opensearch.common.xcontent.XContentType;
import org.opensearch.core.xcontent.XContentBuilder;
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Only XContentBuilder moved to core and not the others in common?

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Based on the commit in core, the current initiative is to only move the xcontent base classes to common, see more detail at opensearch-project/OpenSearch@cb402cb

kkhatua
kkhatua previously approved these changes Mar 29, 2023
Signed-off-by: Khushboo Rajput <[email protected]>
@khushbr khushbr dismissed stale reviews from kkhatua and dzane17 via b70c9d7 March 29, 2023 00:00
@khushbr
Copy link
Collaborator Author

khushbr commented Mar 29, 2023

Some UTs failing?

Thank you for pointing this out, fixed the failing UTs.

@codecov-commenter
Copy link

Codecov Report

Merging #410 (02f3cb4) into 2.x (b03c2ca) will increase coverage by 0.15%.
The diff coverage is n/a.

❗ Current head 02f3cb4 differs from pull request most recent head b70c9d7. Consider uploading reports for the commit b70c9d7 to get more accurate results

📣 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     #410      +/-   ##
============================================
+ Coverage     70.88%   71.04%   +0.15%     
- Complexity      377      378       +1     
============================================
  Files            44       44              
  Lines          2597     2597              
  Branches        176      176              
============================================
+ Hits           1841     1845       +4     
+ Misses          647      644       -3     
+ Partials        109      108       -1     
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
...performanceanalyzer/PerformanceAnalyzerPlugin.java 76.92% <ø> (ø)
...config/PerformanceAnalyzerClusterConfigAction.java 85.96% <ø> (ø)
...action/config/PerformanceAnalyzerConfigAction.java 93.18% <ø> (ø)
...rformanceAnalyzerOverridesClusterConfigAction.java 80.95% <ø> (ø)
...nceanalyzer/http_action/whoami/WhoAmIResponse.java 100.00% <ø> (ø)

... and 1 file with indirect coverage changes

Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants