Skip to content

Conversation

@kcreddy
Copy link
Contributor

@kcreddy kcreddy commented Jan 7, 2026

Proposed commit message

wiz.issue: Remove deprecated "source_rule" field

This is 3rd and final part of #16627 where the deprecated 
"source_rule" field is removed from the "issue" data stream. 
The new "source_rules" field is already added in #16692.

Checklist

  • I have reviewed tips for building integrations and this pull request is aligned with them.
  • I have verified that all data streams collect metrics or logs.
  • I have added an entry to my package's changelog.yml file.
  • I have verified that Kibana version constraints are current according to guidelines.
  • I have verified that any added dashboard complies with Kibana's Dashboard good practices

Related issues

@kcreddy kcreddy changed the title wiz.issue: Remove deprecated sourceRule field wiz.issue: Remove deprecated source_rule field Jan 7, 2026
@kcreddy kcreddy self-assigned this Jan 7, 2026
@kcreddy kcreddy added breaking change Integration:wiz Wiz Team:Security-Service Integrations Security Service Integrations team [elastic/security-service-integrations] labels Jan 7, 2026
@kcreddy kcreddy marked this pull request as ready for review January 7, 2026 09:01
@kcreddy kcreddy requested a review from a team as a code owner January 7, 2026 09:01
@elasticmachine
Copy link

Pinging @elastic/security-service-integrations (Team:Security-Service Integrations)

@elastic-vault-github-plugin-prod

🚀 Benchmarks report

To see the full report comment with /test benchmark fullreport

@andrewkroh andrewkroh added the documentation Improvements or additions to documentation. Applied to PRs that modify *.md files. label Jan 8, 2026
@StacieClark-Elastic
Copy link
Member

StacieClark-Elastic commented Jan 8, 2026

Thank you for this work.
One of the concerns with this deprecation is whether there are dashboards or rules written by other teams that rely on this field. The dashboards that are in the integration do not rely on it but there are concerns that there are other artifacts out of our control that might rely on it. For instance, the customer that created the SDH has written some rules that rely on it.
A longer description describing the change and what the impact on the customer is and how to mitigate the impact would be helpful so they don't have to read through the entire changelog to understand that we added a replacement field.

@kcreddy
Copy link
Contributor Author

kcreddy commented Jan 8, 2026

Thank you for this work. One of the concerns with this deprecation is whether there are dashboards or rules written by other teams that rely on this field. The dashboards that are in the integration do not rely on it but there are concerns that there are other artifacts out of our control that might rely on it. For instance, the customer that created the SDH has written some rules that rely on it. A longer description describing the change and what the impact on the customer is and how to mitigate the impact would be helpful so they don't have to read through the entire changelog to understand that we added a replacement field.

@StacieClark-Elastic, I updated the changelog description to add more details. PTAL.

@elasticmachine
Copy link

💚 Build Succeeded

History

cc @kcreddy

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

Labels

breaking change documentation Improvements or additions to documentation. Applied to PRs that modify *.md files. Integration:wiz Wiz Team:Security-Service Integrations Security Service Integrations team [elastic/security-service-integrations]

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants