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

Deprecate opendistro API paths #5102

Draft
wants to merge 6 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

shikharj05
Copy link
Contributor

@shikharj05 shikharj05 commented Feb 10, 2025

Description

[Describe what this change achieves]

  • Category (Enhancement, New feature, Bug fix, Test fix, Refactoring, Maintenance, Documentation) Maintenance

  • Why these changes are required?
    The security repo has lingering usages of the legacy terms like _opendistro is API paths, these are replaced with _plugins prefix, however legacy paths are not explicitly marked as deprecated.

  • What is the old behavior before changes and new behavior after changes?

Issues Resolved

#5097

Is this a backport? If so, please add backport PR # and/or commits #, and remove backport-failed label from the original PR.

Do these changes introduce new permission(s) to be displayed in the static dropdown on the front-end? If so, please open a draft PR in the security dashboards plugin and link the draft PR here

Testing

TODO

Check List

  • [TODO] New functionality includes testing
  • [TODO] New functionality has been documented
  • [NA] New Roles/Permissions have a corresponding security dashboards plugin PR
  • [NA] API changes companion pull request created
  • 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: shikharj05 <8859327+shikharj05@users.noreply.github.com>
Signed-off-by: shikharj05 <8859327+shikharj05@users.noreply.github.com>
Signed-off-by: shikharj05 <8859327+shikharj05@users.noreply.github.com>
Signed-off-by: shikharj05 <8859327+shikharj05@users.noreply.github.com>
Signed-off-by: shikharj05 <8859327+shikharj05@users.noreply.github.com>
Signed-off-by: shikharj05 <8859327+shikharj05@users.noreply.github.com>
Copy link

codecov bot commented Feb 10, 2025

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 71.65%. Comparing base (e1c05c3) to head (cb87420).

Additional details and impacted files

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #5102      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   71.55%   71.65%   +0.10%     
==========================================
  Files         336      336              
  Lines       22649    22715      +66     
  Branches     3603     3603              
==========================================
+ Hits        16206    16277      +71     
  Misses       4641     4641              
+ Partials     1802     1797       -5     
Files with missing lines Coverage Δ
.../opensearch/security/OpenSearchSecurityPlugin.java 83.79% <ø> (ø)
...earch/security/dlic/rest/api/AccountApiAction.java 98.64% <100.00%> (+0.05%) ⬆️
.../security/dlic/rest/api/ActionGroupsApiAction.java 98.27% <100.00%> (+0.09%) ⬆️
...nsearch/security/dlic/rest/api/AuditApiAction.java 91.17% <100.00%> (-2.67%) ⬇️
...curity/dlic/rest/api/AuthTokenProcessorAction.java 92.85% <100.00%> (+1.94%) ⬆️
...security/dlic/rest/api/ConfigUpgradeApiAction.java 87.41% <100.00%> (+0.25%) ⬆️
...ch/security/dlic/rest/api/FlushCacheApiAction.java 67.85% <100.00%> (+3.85%) ⬆️
...security/dlic/rest/api/InternalUsersApiAction.java 93.54% <100.00%> (+0.15%) ⬆️
...ity/dlic/rest/api/MultiTenancyConfigApiAction.java 90.90% <100.00%> (+0.36%) ⬆️
...earch/security/dlic/rest/api/NodesDnApiAction.java 90.90% <100.00%> (+1.16%) ⬆️
... and 13 more

... and 10 files with indirect coverage changes

@cwperks
Copy link
Member

cwperks commented Feb 11, 2025

@shikharj05 The changes look good to me in this PR. What is remaining before taking it out of draft?

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.

2 participants