I feel if the upgrade from 5.x to 6.x client doesn't introduce any breaking changes, we can continue with the name that we are having now.
- Sivaprasanna On Sun, Jun 10, 2018 at 5:16 PM, Mike Thomsen <mikerthom...@gmail.com> wrote: > The current implementation uses the last stable release of the 5.X client > from Elastic, and 6.X is already mature so we'll need to be able to have > room to create a new implementation copy that uses that client if there are > things we have to change between them. So does it make sense to throw in a > new ticket to rename the service to something that indicates that this > implementation is officially for 5.X? As of 1.6 I think only one processor, > JsonQueryElasticSearch, uses it so not many uses would likely be impacted > yet. > > Thanks, > > Mike >
