-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 102
Update rest-api-spec 8.15 #2876
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
Conversation
466a098
to
dc50e1a
Compare
@@ -7,8 +7,7 @@ | |||
"stability": "stable", | |||
"visibility": "public", | |||
"headers": { | |||
"accept": ["application/json"], | |||
"content_type": ["application/json"] | |||
"accept": ["application/json"] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@pquentin isn't this what you fixed the other day for the python client? is there a way we can ignore this?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yes! I opened elastic/elasticsearch#112581 late last week to fix this but it took a bit of time to be merged and backported to 8.15. Then the Elasticsearch build was failing over the weekend so there was no available artifact with the changes. Thankfully the Elasticsearch build passed during the night and this diff was thus removed automatically from this pull request.
The validation errors seem to be outdated, the two missing parameters were recently added |
dc50e1a
to
f89b77d
Compare
Actually, the errors here got solved because a change in Elasticsearch resolved the diff between the JSON spec and the Elasticsearch specification. It's good new, not bad news! |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This now looks good to me but I'd appreciate if someone could confirm my reasoning here.
As titled.