Skip to content

SOLR-16396: Align v2 full-config section keys with pluralised forms - #5175

Open
jaykay12 wants to merge 7 commits into
apache:mainfrom
jaykay12:SOLR-16396-plural-config-all-fix
Open

jaykay12 wants to merge 7 commits into
apache:mainfrom
jaykay12:SOLR-16396-plural-config-all-fix

Conversation

@jaykay12

@jaykay12 jaykay12 commented Oct 16, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-16396

Description

Align v2 full-config section keys with pluralised forms

Solution

Since, this is an ongoing initiative, imo no CL is required here.

Tests

Please describe the tests you've developed or run to confirm this patch implements the feature or solves the problem.

Checklist

Please review the following and check all that apply:

  • I have reviewed the guidelines for How to Contribute and my code conforms to the standards described there to the best of my ability.
  • I have created a Jira issue and added the issue ID to my pull request title.
  • I have given Solr maintainers access to contribute to my PR branch. (optional but recommended, not available for branches on forks living under an organisation)
  • I have developed this patch against the main branch.
  • I have run ./gradlew check.
  • I have added tests for my changes.
  • I have added documentation for the Reference Guide
  • I have added a changelog entry for my change

@github-actions github-actions Bot added the tests label Oct 16, 2026
@jaykay12

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

/no-changelog

@jaykay12

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Testing Evidences

Scenario Main Feature Veridict
V2 full config Screenshot 2026-10-17 at 4 29 39 AM Screenshot 2026-10-17 at 4 27 15 AM Fixed now ✅
- - - -
V2 filtered config Screenshot 2026-10-17 at 4 28 46 AM Screenshot 2026-10-17 at 4 26 08 AM Was already correct 👍🏽

@jaykay12 jaykay12 left a comment •

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@epugh please help in triggering workflows for this fix.

@epugh

epugh commented Oct 17, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Agreed no changelog needed

@epugh epugh left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This makes sense.... however do we need to document in the ref guide the two different out puts? Between v1 and v2?

The V1/V2 full-config output comparison only called out the children-key
difference; add the searchComponent/queryResponseWriter pluralization
this PR introduces, shown the same way as the existing children-key
example (separate V1/V2 JSON output per tab).

Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 5 <[email protected]>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01RzzUgiebQ8ZhhgE2E7ZZU5
@github-actions github-actions Bot added the documentation Improvements or additions to documentation label Oct 17, 2026
epugh and others added 2 commits October 17, 2026 11:10
The new V1/V2 full-config diff duplicated the elevator/xslt example and
explanation already given a few dozen lines down, where the per-section
GET endpoints are documented. Drop the redundant JSON snippets and keep
a single forward-pointing sentence instead.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 5 <[email protected]>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01RzzUgiebQ8ZhhgE2E7ZZU5
reqhandlertests() is shared between v1 and v2 harness runs (toggled
randomly in @before), and asserted the singular "searchComponent" key
against the bare /config endpoint regardless of API version. Since
GetConfig#getConfig now pluralizes that key under v2, the test failed
whenever the random toggle picked v2 (reproduced with CI's exact seed
177EED04838EDD3C). Pick the expected key based on the harness's URL.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 5 <[email protected]>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01RzzUgiebQ8ZhhgE2E7ZZU5
@jaykay12

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

This makes sense.... however do we need to document in the ref guide the two different out puts? Between v1 and v2?

thanks @epugh for doing ref guide updates this time. I will try keeping them in sync from next PRs.

can we retrigger the workflows & verify once.

@jaykay12
jaykay12 requested a review from epugh October 17, 2026 20:06
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

documentation Improvements or additions to documentation no-changelog tests

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants