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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
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
Enable deprecation checks for removed settings #53317
Enable deprecation checks for removed settings #53317
Changes from 4 commits
e54110e
b29c683
c366117
42b5aad
efb7740
e9a24da
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
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.
should this be
WARNING
instead ofCRITICAL
?If the setting is removed, won't it be be "archived" allowing the server to continue to function ? I think we are trying to reserve
CRITICAL
for things items that will prevent the server from running.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.
Not necessarily, because these could be node level settings, which we don't archive, which do prevent startup if they are unrecognized. Also, we have discussing removing the archiving of settings, so this behavior could change for cluster-level settings too.
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.
In that case, should we flex WARNING or CRITICAL based if the setting has node scope ?
Also, should we check that that value is not the default value here so we don't issue an issue a deprecation issue for settings that user never changed ?
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.
There is a check that the setting is not set on line 18?
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.
ah .. i missed "Note that fallback settings are excluded." in the exists method.
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.
Yeah, that's why we have
Setting#existsOrFallbackExists
.