Skip to content

Version bump to 2.0.0.0-SNAPSHOT#892

Closed
davidlago wants to merge 4 commits intoopensearch-project:2.0from
davidlago:version-bump-2-0-0
Closed

Version bump to 2.0.0.0-SNAPSHOT#892
davidlago wants to merge 4 commits intoopensearch-project:2.0from
davidlago:version-bump-2-0-0

Conversation

@davidlago
Copy link

Signed-off-by: Dave Lago davelago@amazon.com

Description

Creating the 2.0 branch with a version bump. Once tests pass this will become the new main and main will become 1.x, to align with the branching strategy of the main project.

  • Category: Maintenance
  • Why these changes are required? Future development iterations
  • What is the old behavior before changes and new behavior after changes? N/A

Issues Resolved

N/A

Testing

N/A

Check List

  • New functionality includes testing
  • New functionality has been documented
  • 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: Dave Lago <davelago@amazon.com>
@davidlago davidlago requested a review from a team January 19, 2022 13:28
@davidlago
Copy link
Author

Needs opensearch-project/security#1577 to merge and 2.0.0.0-SNAPSHOT artifacts of the security plugin to be uploaded in order to pass CI after updating the URLS here

@davidlago davidlago changed the base branch from main to 2.0 January 19, 2022 13:29
Signed-off-by: Dave Lago <davelago@amazon.com>

- name: Download OpenSearch Security Plugin
run: wget -O opensearch-security.zip https://ci.opensearch.org/ci/dbc/distribution-build-opensearch/1.3.0/488/linux/x64/builds/opensearch/plugins/opensearch-security-1.3.0.0.zip
run: wget -O opensearch-security.zip https://TBD/opensearch-security-2.0.0.0.zip
Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Need to update after opensearch-project/security#1577 produces a 2.0.0 artifact

Signed-off-by: Dave Lago <davelago@amazon.com>
path: OpenSearch-Dashboards
repository: opensearch-project/OpenSearch-Dashboards
ref: '1.x'
ref: '2.x'
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Does this branch exist?

I thought 2.0 were on main

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

you are correct, updating

Signed-off-by: Dave Lago <davelago@amazon.com>
Copy link
Member

@peternied peternied left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

It doesn't look like the integration tests ran with this change, was that expected?

@@ -0,0 +1 @@
14.18.2
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Do we need to explicitly declare or can we transitivity pick this up from OpenSearch Dashboards version?

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Interesting, yeah... we do for the integration tests run here. I honestly just added it as a convenience so that it stands by itself, but to be honest I'm not sure if we ever build this project without being "nested" inside of the Dashboards codebase.

@davidlago
Copy link
Author

It doesn't look like the integration tests ran with this change, was that expected?

No, this is the first 2.x branch, it's probably not triggering the workflow, we need to add it to the rule (or make it generic enough).

@davidlago
Copy link
Author

It doesn't look like the integration tests ran with this change, was that expected?

No, this is the first 2.x branch, it's probably not triggering the workflow, we need to add it to the rule (or make it generic enough).

Also, had they run, they would have failed left and right as @hsiang9431-amzn is still looking into #875

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.

4 participants