Make user.group a nesting of the group field set
#308
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
Philosophical question: the changelog entry goes under "breaking", or "bugfixes"? :-) |
|
@cwurm for awareness |
|
For the changelog, it should be mentioned in both places. It's a bug fix but a breaking bug fix. |
ruflin
approved these changes
Jan 23, 2019
|
I just duplicated the whole changelog entry as is. Considered wording it differently (why it's a bugfix), but I figure if people care, they'll check out the PR and the issue. |
|
@webmat I stumbled over this but was not sure if I should comment. If you can word it differently would appreciate it. |
|
Ok, will do ;-) |
webmat
pushed a commit
to webmat/beats
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 24, 2019
Imports the hanges from elastic/ecs#308.
webmat
added a commit
to elastic/beats
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 24, 2019
This change enables us to nest the `group` field set at `user.group`, rather than being limited to only group name. Imports the changes from ECS elastic/ecs#308, which solves elastic/ecs#304.
webmat
added a commit
to webmat/ecs
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 5, 2019
Breaking change. Field set name "group" was being used as a leaf field at `user.group`. It had different semantics as the field set: it was a keyword field, instead of being a nesting of the field set. This goes against a driving principle of ECS, and has been corrected. We removed the `user.group` `keyword` field (introduced in elastic#204), and made the `group` field set nestable at `user.group`.
webmat
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 5, 2019
…#355) Cherry-pick of PR #308 to 1.0 branch. Original message: Breaking change. Field set name "group" was being used as a leaf field at `user.group`. It had different semantics as the field set: it was a keyword field, instead of being a nesting of the field set. This goes against a driving principle of ECS, and has been corrected. We removed the `user.group` `keyword` field (introduced in #204), and made the `group` field set nestable at `user.group`.
DStape
pushed a commit
to DStape/beats
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 20, 2019
This change enables us to nest the `group` field set at `user.group`, rather than being limited to only group name. Imports the changes from ECS elastic/ecs#308, which solves elastic/ecs#304.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
An error slipped in, and instead of nesting the
groupfield set atuser.group, we originally made this akeywordfield.This PR introduces a breaking change, but we are aiming to introduce this fix in ECS 1.0.0 GA.
The initial implementation went against our principle of not reusing top level object names elsewhere in the hierarchy, using different semantics.
This PR closes #304.