Changing HeaderWarning to always use 299 as the warning code (#80304) #80503
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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
…#80304) This commit changes the deprecation logger so that all messages (critical or warning) are written out with "299" as the level at the beginning of the header in order to be compliant with https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7234.html#section-5.5.7. In elastic#79107 we mistakenly began logging warning-level messages with the 300 code, which is not valid in the RFC.
|
Pinging @elastic/es-data-management (Team:Data Management) |
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
This commit changes the deprecation logger so that all messages (critical or warning) are written
out with "299" as the level at the beginning of the header in order to be compliant with
https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7234.html#section-5.5.7. In #79107 we mistakenly began logging
warning-level messages with the 300 code, which is not valid in the RFC.