Skip to content

[Fortinet] Deprecate original integration & change logfile to filestream #3819

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

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Aug 16, 2022

Conversation

legoguy1000
Copy link
Contributor

What does this PR do?

  • Deprecate original Fortinet integration
  • Swap the logfile legacy input for the filestream input

Checklist

  • I have reviewed tips for building integrations and this pull request is aligned with them.
  • I have verified that all data streams collect metrics or logs.
  • I have added an entry to my package's changelog.yml file.
  • I have verified that Kibana version constraints are current according to guidelines.

Author's Checklist

  • [ ]

How to test this PR locally

Related issues

Screenshots

@legoguy1000 legoguy1000 requested a review from a team as a code owner July 25, 2022 01:57
@elasticmachine
Copy link

elasticmachine commented Jul 25, 2022

💚 Build Succeeded

the below badges are clickable and redirect to their specific view in the CI or DOCS
Pipeline View Test View Changes Artifacts preview preview

Expand to view the summary

Build stats

  • Start Time: 2022-08-15T22:13:59.319+0000

  • Duration: 26 min 52 sec

Test stats 🧪

Test Results
Failed 0
Passed 60
Skipped 0
Total 60

🤖 GitHub comments

To re-run your PR in the CI, just comment with:

  • /test : Re-trigger the build.

@efd6
Copy link
Contributor

efd6 commented Jul 25, 2022

/test

@elasticmachine
Copy link

elasticmachine commented Jul 25, 2022

🌐 Coverage report

Name Metrics % (covered/total) Diff
Packages 100.0% (8/8) 💚
Files 100.0% (14/14) 💚 2.868
Classes 100.0% (14/14) 💚 2.868
Methods 92.029% (127/138) 👍 2.803
Lines 90.741% (2499/2754) 👎 -0.001
Conditionals 100.0% (0/0) 💚

@legoguy1000
Copy link
Contributor Author

@efd6 comments resolved.

@efd6
Copy link
Contributor

efd6 commented Jul 27, 2022

/test

@legoguy1000 legoguy1000 force-pushed the fortinet-filestream-input branch from 7107817 to 67985c0 Compare August 2, 2022 00:17
@efd6
Copy link
Contributor

efd6 commented Aug 2, 2022

/test

1 similar comment
@efd6
Copy link
Contributor

efd6 commented Aug 2, 2022

/test

@andrewkroh andrewkroh added Team:Security-External Integrations Integration:Fortinet (Deprecated) Use one of the specific fortinet_X labels. [Integration not found in source] labels Aug 15, 2022
@elasticmachine
Copy link

Pinging @elastic/security-external-integrations (Team:Security-External Integrations)

Copy link
Member

@andrewkroh andrewkroh left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think changing from log to filestream will cause problems for users because they will lose their existing state. Much of this is discussed in #2518. I think we should hold off on this change given the packages are GA. We'll cover making the change with #2518.

So I think the filestream changes should be reverted.

@legoguy1000
Copy link
Contributor Author

@andrewkroh Will do.

@legoguy1000 legoguy1000 force-pushed the fortinet-filestream-input branch from 82e087d to ad51d5f Compare August 15, 2022 21:59
@legoguy1000 legoguy1000 force-pushed the fortinet-filestream-input branch from ad51d5f to 994c676 Compare August 15, 2022 22:01
@legoguy1000 legoguy1000 requested a review from andrewkroh August 15, 2022 22:02
@legoguy1000
Copy link
Contributor Author

GTG

@andrewkroh andrewkroh merged commit 7b0b71e into elastic:main Aug 16, 2022
@legoguy1000 legoguy1000 deleted the fortinet-filestream-input branch August 16, 2022 00:32
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Integration:Fortinet (Deprecated) Use one of the specific fortinet_X labels. [Integration not found in source]
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants