Add compliance tests for 3.1.0 #709
Conversation
jsoriano
force-pushed
the
compliance-3.1.0
branch
from
2d638f3 to
92dd517
Compare
| Scenario: Installer leverages subobjects false | ||
| Given the "subobjects_false" package is installed | ||
| And a policy is created with "subobjects_false" package | ||
| Then index template "metrics-subobjects_false.foo" has a field "foo.object" with "subobjects:false" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is the main reason to stop using the typed API, with this one there is no way to check if a property has the subobjects property:
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It would be great to be able to use the typed API, but it's true that not using it give us more flexibility.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes, the typed API is quite nice, but limited for some things, and complicated for dynamic objects in responses.
| } | ||
| nextProperties, ok := nextPropertiesValue.Interface().(map[string]types.Property) | ||
| if !ok { | ||
| return nil, fmt.Errorf("property %q not found in index template, cannot convert properties", name) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Another problem of the typed API is that we ended up relying on reflection for some things.
💚 Build Succeeded
History
cc @jsoriano |
| @@ -26,7 +26,8 @@ steps: | |||
| EOF | |||
|
|
|||
| # Generate each test we want to do. | |||
| compliance_test 8.10.0-SNAPSHOT 2.10.0 | |||
| compliance_test 8.13.0-SNAPSHOT 3.1.0 | |||
| compliance_test 8.12.0 3.0.4 | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Could it be used a non released spec version here too ? Would it make sense ?
I was thinking of adding here also the current 3.0.5-next version as a version to comply too (so we have the stable and the next one).
| compliance_test 8.12.0 3.0.4 | |
| compliance_test 8.12.0 3.0.5-next | |
| compliance_test 8.12.0 3.0.4 |
Or just use compliance_test 8.12.0 3.0.5-next ?
It's also true that there is no test package with version 3.0.* currently
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Umm, actually I did some changes to be able to test with unreleased versions, in principle we could have tested 3.0.5 without the next suffix, as is done with 3.1.0.
| Scenario: Installer leverages subobjects false | ||
| Given the "subobjects_false" package is installed | ||
| And a policy is created with "subobjects_false" package | ||
| Then index template "metrics-subobjects_false.foo" has a field "foo.object" with "subobjects:false" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It would be great to be able to use the typed API, but it's true that not using it give us more flexibility.
What does this PR do?
Add compliance tests for features added in 3.1.0.
For that I had to migrate to the untyped Elasticsearch API as the typed one doesn't have a way to see if a field is using
subobjectsor not.Why is it important?
To validate if we can increase the max version supported by Kibana.