Update dependency on elastic-package#987
Conversation
|
@ycombinator @rw-access I can't figure out which format of security_rule is correct: Please look at the "rule_id" and "id". |
💚 Build Succeeded
Expand to view the summary
Build stats
Test stats 🧪
Trends 🧪 |
|
Oh! I didn't realize spec was validating anything other than JSON so the spec was out of date. The format inside the integration that's structured like a SO is correct. |
|
Thanks @rw-access for clarifying this. It seems that we need to fix the package-spec. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
These changes seem unrelated to the security rule naming changes?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Linting failed. It seems that the spec hasn't been updated.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ah, I see. You're referring to the commit name.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
wait this isn't right. I don't understand why this happened
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We have a rule that ID should consistent with filename. Do you prefer to go the other way round, I mean to rename the file?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The rule ID can't change, it's defined elsewhere. So we could change the filename. That's fine with me.
I don't really understand why it's a hard and fast requirement or why the change is necessary, to be honest.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It's for readability and clarity purposes. We encountered misnaming in the past, e.g. "access-logs-dashboard.json" which contains "error-logs-overview". This way we simplify navigating through resources.
This PR bumps up dependency on the elastic-package (changes around semantic validation of spec).