[SERVER-69195] Document the guidelines for FCV related error messages Created: 26/Aug/22 Updated: 21/Feb/23 |
|
| Status: | Backlog |
| Project: | Core Server |
| Component/s: | None |
| Affects Version/s: | None |
| Fix Version/s: | None |
| Type: | Improvement | Priority: | Major - P3 |
| Reporter: | Pavithra Vetriselvan | Assignee: | Backlog - Replication Team |
| Resolution: | Unresolved | Votes: | 0 |
| Labels: | None | ||
| Remaining Estimate: | Not Specified | ||
| Time Spent: | Not Specified | ||
| Original Estimate: | Not Specified | ||
| Assigned Teams: |
Replication
|
| Participants: |
| Description |
|
Currently, there aren't a set of guidelines around standardizing the way we write error messages related to FCV. This can lead to confusing instances such as It would be nice to have a recommendation for how to format these messages and what information is necessary across the server. For example, should we mention the version specifically? Should we point users to official documentation? |
| Comments |
| Comment by Gregory Noma [ 26/Aug/22 ] |
|
I think the issue is that it isn't really about FCV on its own so much as it is about the combination of FCV and feature flags. For instance, imagine a case where we have a feature that is released in 6.2 but the feature flag existed in 6.1. On a 6.1 binary (regardless of FCV), an error message like the one in |