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

ISSUES-1669: Allow 0 value for Version in Bulk Delete Request #1674

Conversation

garrison-stauffer
Copy link

This change addresses the issue outlined in #1669

0 is a valid value for the external version, but when submitting it for bulk deletes - it is not serialized in json. This PR brings the BulkDeleteRequest to parity with the BulkIndexRequest which was updated in this commit.

@garrison-stauffer
Copy link
Author

garrison-stauffer commented Jul 20, 2023

@olivere apologies for another tag, but this we'd really like to get this change merged in if possible, but acknowledge that this repo is deprecated

@olivere
Copy link
Owner

olivere commented Jul 21, 2023

@garrison-stauffer Sorry for the late reply. I see what you're after, and if this project would really be actively maintained, I would merge this in a second. However, I've moved on, and doing so would send the signal that this project is still maintained, and people will join the queue and ask for their features to be added (because: "After all, it's just a simple change.").

I've dedicated 7 years of free time from my life to maintain this client, and I'm 💔 to tell people to move on to the official client. But it is like it is: I don't have the capacity to work on this and keep-up or even compete with the Elastic people. So your best bet short-term is to maintain your own fork of the client, and change your code to use the official Go client long-term.

Again, I'm sorry.

P.S.:
See here for a longer discussion in the past.

Edit: typos.

@olivere olivere closed this Jul 21, 2023
@garrison-stauffer
Copy link
Author

Hey, just wanted to say thanks for the response. I understand the direction, and while (selfishly) unfortunate, I totally get it.

I appreciate all the work put into this library, easily the best go integration for Elasticsearch by far, and I'm happy to see that its living on through the ES library. Hope we can get some guarantees about where Opensearch will/wont diverge so we'd feel more comfortable using the client going forward, but alas.

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.

None yet

2 participants