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

[Backport] [2.x] Reconsider the breaking changes check policy to detect breaking changes against released versions (#13292) #13310

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Apr 19, 2024
Merged

[Backport] [2.x] Reconsider the breaking changes check policy to detect breaking changes against released versions (#13292) #13310

merged 1 commit into from
Apr 19, 2024

Conversation

reta
Copy link
Collaborator

@reta reta commented Apr 19, 2024

Backport of #13292 to 2.x

@reta
Copy link
Collaborator Author

reta commented Apr 19, 2024

@peternied funny enough, 2.x is already breaking API compatibility :(

@github-actions GitHub Actions
Copy link
Contributor

✅ Gradle check result for 55cd29b: SUCCESS

@codecov Codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Apr 19, 2024 •
edited
Loading

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 71.12%. Comparing base (0dd892c) to head (880f21f).
Report is 159 commits behind head on 2.x.

Additional details and impacted files 
@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##                2.x   #13310      +/-   ##
============================================
- Coverage     71.28%   71.12%   -0.16%     
- Complexity    60145    60575     +430     
============================================
  Files          4957     5004      +47     
  Lines        282799   285424    +2625     
  Branches      41409    41730     +321     
============================================
+ Hits         201591   203008    +1417     
- Misses        64189    65252    +1063     
- Partials      17019    17164     +145

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@reta
Reconsider the breaking changes check policy to detect breaking chang…
880f21f 
…es against released versions (opensearch-project#13292)

* Reconsider the breaking changes check policy to detect breaking changes against released versions

Signed-off-by: Andriy Redko <andriy.redko@aiven.io>

* Add an ability to provide the target version to compare with for japicmp tasks

Signed-off-by: Andriy Redko <andriy.redko@aiven.io>

* Add documentation for japicmp tasks

Signed-off-by: Andriy Redko <andriy.redko@aiven.io>

---------

Signed-off-by: Andriy Redko <andriy.redko@aiven.io>
(cherry picked from commit b4692c8)
Signed-off-by: Andriy Redko <andriy.redko@aiven.io>
@reta reta force-pushed the backport/backport-13292-to-2.x branch from 55cd29b to 880f21f Compare April 19, 2024 16:55
@reta reta requested a review from peternied as a code owner April 19, 2024 16:55
@peternied
Copy link
Member

@peternied funny enough, 2.x is already breaking API compatibility :(

What do you want to do about the breaking changes from 2.13 -> 2.14? It feels like we need a release blocking issue to identify and resolve what we accept vs revert 😵‍💫

@reta
Copy link
Collaborator Author

reta commented Apr 19, 2024

What do you want to do about the breaking changes from 2.13 -> 2.14? It feels like we need a release blocking issue to identify and resolve what we accept vs revert 😵‍💫

I think some of them we could address in scope of #13308, for now I made a change to fallback to the current compatibility target (latest snapshot).

@github-actions GitHub Actions
Copy link
Contributor

❕ Gradle check result for 880f21f: UNSTABLE

  • TEST FAILURES:
      2 org.opensearch.cluster.coordination.AwarenessAttributeDecommissionIT.testConcurrentDecommissionAction

Please review all flaky tests that succeeded after retry and create an issue if one does not already exist to track the flaky failure.

@peternied peternied merged commit 15a434d into opensearch-project:2.x Apr 19, 2024
29 of 30 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@deshsidd deshsidd deshsidd approved these changes

@peternied peternied peternied approved these changes

@anasalkouz anasalkouz Awaiting requested review from anasalkouz anasalkouz is a code owner

@andrross andrross Awaiting requested review from andrross andrross is a code owner

@Bukhtawar Bukhtawar Awaiting requested review from Bukhtawar Bukhtawar is a code owner

@CEHENKLE CEHENKLE Awaiting requested review from CEHENKLE CEHENKLE is a code owner

@dblock dblock Awaiting requested review from dblock dblock is a code owner

@dbwiddis dbwiddis Awaiting requested review from dbwiddis dbwiddis is a code owner

@dreamer-89 dreamer-89 Awaiting requested review from dreamer-89

@gbbafna gbbafna Awaiting requested review from gbbafna gbbafna is a code owner

@kotwanikunal kotwanikunal Awaiting requested review from kotwanikunal kotwanikunal is a code owner

@mch2 mch2 Awaiting requested review from mch2 mch2 is a code owner

@msfroh msfroh Awaiting requested review from msfroh msfroh is a code owner

@nknize nknize Awaiting requested review from nknize nknize is a code owner

@owaiskazi19 owaiskazi19 Awaiting requested review from owaiskazi19 owaiskazi19 is a code owner

@Rishikesh1159 Rishikesh1159 Awaiting requested review from Rishikesh1159 Rishikesh1159 is a code owner

@sachinpkale sachinpkale Awaiting requested review from sachinpkale sachinpkale is a code owner

@saratvemulapalli saratvemulapalli Awaiting requested review from saratvemulapalli saratvemulapalli is a code owner

@shwetathareja shwetathareja Awaiting requested review from shwetathareja shwetathareja is a code owner

@sohami sohami Awaiting requested review from sohami sohami is a code owner

@tlfeng tlfeng Awaiting requested review from tlfeng

@VachaShah VachaShah Awaiting requested review from VachaShah VachaShah is a code owner

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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
3 participants
@reta @peternied @deshsidd