We read every piece of feedback, and take your input very seriously.
To see all available qualifiers, see our documentation.
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
What is the bug?
In https://github.com/opensearch-project/index-management/blob/395317dcc40762fc05b4320885c2ea27be572324/src/main/kotlin/org/opensearch/indexmanagement/indexstatemanagement/resthandler/RestIndexPolicyAction.kt#L72C33-L72C41 we use policyID instead of what I think should be policy_id.
policyID
policy_id
What is the expected behavior?
Add support for the latter and deprecate the former.
[INFO] => PUT /_plugins/_ism/policies ({ "policyID": "rollover", "if_primary_term": 2, "if_seq_no": 3547 }) [application/json] { ...
Do you have any additional context?
Coming from opensearch-project/opensearch-api-specification#578.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
We can pickup adding support for policy_id and deprecate policyId based on documentation : https://opensearch.org/docs/latest/im-plugin/ism/policies/
Sorry, something went wrong.
No branches or pull requests
What is the bug?
In https://github.com/opensearch-project/index-management/blob/395317dcc40762fc05b4320885c2ea27be572324/src/main/kotlin/org/opensearch/indexmanagement/indexstatemanagement/resthandler/RestIndexPolicyAction.kt#L72C33-L72C41 we use
policyID
instead of what I think should bepolicy_id
.What is the expected behavior?
Add support for the latter and deprecate the former.
Do you have any additional context?
Coming from opensearch-project/opensearch-api-specification#578.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: