Skip to content
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

Changes related to the next MeiliSearch release (v0.25.0) #273

Merged
merged 14 commits into from Jan 12, 2022

Conversation

meili-bot
Copy link
Contributor

Related to this issue: meilisearch/integration-guides#157

This PR:

  • gathers the changes related to the next MeiliSearch release (v0.25.0) so that this package is ready when the official release is out.
  • should pass the tests against the latest pre-release of MeiliSearch.
  • might eventually contain test failures until the MeiliSearch v0.25.0 is out.

⚠️ This PR should NOT be merged until the next release of MeiliSearch (v0.25.0) is out.

This PR is auto-generated for the pre-release week purpose.

@curquiza curquiza added the breaking-change The related changes are breaking for the users label Dec 13, 2021
* First verison of the new task API

* Create task.rb

* Fix linter error

* Add tests for client.wait_for_task

* Fix linter errors
* Add API keys methods

* Fix linter errors
@curquiza
Copy link
Member

curquiza commented Jan 4, 2022

bors try

meili-bors bot added a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 4, 2022
@meili-bors
Copy link
Contributor

meili-bors bot commented Jan 4, 2022

try

Build failed:

Copy link
Member

@brunoocasali brunoocasali left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Hey, @curquiza thanks for your awesome work (as always) on this! 💟

I left some comments, ideas, suggestions, feel free to reach me out with any doubt :)
Oh, I didn’t comment on every item I found, but most of the comments regarding specs could be applied on other spec cases :)

lib/meilisearch.rb Show resolved Hide resolved
lib/meilisearch/http_request.rb Show resolved Hide resolved
lib/meilisearch/index.rb Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
lib/meilisearch/task.rb Show resolved Hide resolved
spec/meilisearch/client/indexes_spec.rb Show resolved Hide resolved
lib/meilisearch/task.rb Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
lib/meilisearch/client.rb Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
spec/meilisearch/client/keys_spec.rb Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
spec/meilisearch/client/keys_spec.rb Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
expect(response).to have_key('hits')
end
new_client = MeiliSearch::Client.new(URL, public_key['key'])
response = new_client.index(uid).search('test')
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

If we just make the "search" without adding documents we could make an assertion by just ensuring there were no meilisearch_api_errors. That way we could simplify a bit this spec 🦘

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We need to create an index to perform the search, so I can replace add_documents! with create_index!, but it does not simplify the spec :(

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I was thinking about something like this:

let(:public_client) { MeiliSearch::Client.new(URL, public_key['key']) }

it 'succeeds to search when using public key' do
  uid = random_uid

  expect {
    public_client.index(uid).search('test')
  }.not_to raise_meilisearch_api_error_with(...)
end
  • public_client could be reused
  • we only check if no errors are produced since we don’t care about the search result

(btw, I did this here on the comment, probably there are some typo)

Feel free to disagree as well haha 🍔

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

If the index does not exist, public_client.index(uid).search('test') will return a 404 since the index does not exist. You cannot search in a non-existing index

* Add code samples for v0.25.0

* Update .code-samples.meilisearch.yaml
Copy link
Contributor

@alallema alallema left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I just came to copy over your README changes and saw a typo.

.code-samples.meilisearch.yaml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
.code-samples.meilisearch.yaml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
README.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
curquiza and others added 4 commits January 12, 2022 11:47
Co-authored-by: Amélie <alallema@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Amélie <alallema@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Amélie <alallema@users.noreply.github.com>
* Apply changes after the review

* Fix linter errors
@curquiza curquiza marked this pull request as ready for review January 12, 2022 12:41
@curquiza
Copy link
Member

bors try

meili-bors bot added a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 12, 2022
@meili-bors
Copy link
Contributor

meili-bors bot commented Jan 12, 2022

Copy link
Contributor

@alallema alallema left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM! 💪

Copy link
Member

@brunoocasali brunoocasali left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Awesome work @curquiza 🎉 🌮

@brunoocasali
Copy link
Member

bors merge

@meili-bors
Copy link
Contributor

meili-bors bot commented Jan 12, 2022

@meili-bors meili-bors bot merged commit 9290118 into main Jan 12, 2022
@meili-bors meili-bors bot deleted the bump-meilisearch-v0.25.0 branch January 12, 2022 13:43
meili-bors bot added a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 12, 2022
289: Update version for the next release (v0.18.0) r=brunoocasali a=curquiza

Why is it breaking?
- #276
- #277
- #278
- #273

Co-authored-by: Clémentine Urquizar - curqui <clementine@meilisearch.com>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
breaking-change The related changes are breaking for the users
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

4 participants