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

Use transport actions instead of guice for xpack info #43449

Merged
merged 13 commits into from
Jun 24, 2019

Conversation

rjernst
Copy link
Member

@rjernst rjernst commented Jun 20, 2019

The Xpack info API internally gathers all xpack feature sets by using
guice to bind many implementations. The info api then iterates over
these feature sets to gather usage information for each. However, since
each of these implementations are in different plugins, there is no
direct, non-guice way for them to register the implementations. This
commit removes the dependence on guice for the info api by having the
core xpack jar contain an action instance for each plugin, and the
implementation of those actions are then registered within each xpack
feature plugin. The info api then iterates over each of these actions
and calls them with the NodeClient.

rjernst added 4 commits June 20, 2019 11:48
The Xpack info API internally gathers all xpack feature sets by using
guice to bind many implementations. The info api then iterates over
these feature sets to gather usage information for each. However, since
each of these implementations are in different plugins, there is no
direct, non-guice way for them to register the implementations. This
commit removes the dependence on guice for the info api by having the
core xpack jar contain an action instance for each plugin, and the
implementation of those actions are then registered within each xpack
feature plugin. The info api then iterates over each of these actions
and calls them with the NodeClient.
Copy link
Contributor

@talevy talevy left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

overall looks good! just a nit and request for more javadoc

I suspect there are existing xpack info rest tests that are unchanged, right?

@rjernst
Copy link
Member Author

rjernst commented Jun 21, 2019

@talevy I addressed your comments. In answer to your question about tests: yes, there are existing tests for all the info action implementations. These are just the feature set tests we had before but renamed.

Copy link
Contributor

@talevy talevy left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM pending some test fixes

@rjernst rjernst added :Core/Infra/Core Core issues without another label v8.0.0 labels Jun 24, 2019
@elasticmachine
Copy link
Collaborator

Pinging @elastic/es-core-infra

@rjernst rjernst merged commit f666cee into elastic:master Jun 24, 2019
@rjernst rjernst deleted the deguice47 branch June 24, 2019 06:28
ywelsch added a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 25, 2019
PR builds on #43410 had not picked up the change merged in #43449
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
:Core/Infra/Core Core issues without another label >refactoring v8.0.0-alpha1
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants