Pin faraday-v2.

[mashhurs]

Release notes

[rn:skip]

What does this PR do?

Pins the faraday-v2.

The situation: I was expecting to consume faraday-v2 as we updated elasticsearch-ruby client to 8.x. However, after backporting and updating Gemlock file, I have witnessed that we have still faraday-v1 in 9.0 branch which is unnecessary.
9.0 branch already includes this pin and updated Gemlock file: #17309

Why is it important/What is the impact to the user?

This PR pins the faraday-v2 to make sure we align with the version in elasticsearch-ruby client.

Checklist

• My code follows the style guidelines of this project
• I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
• I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
• I have made corresponding change to the default configuration files (and/or docker env variables)
• I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works

Author's Checklist

• [ ]

How to test this PR locally

Related issues

Use cases

Screenshots

Logs

[mergify]

This pull request does not have a backport label. Could you fix it @mashhurs? 🙏
To fixup this pull request, you need to add the backport labels for the needed
branches, such as:

• backport-8./d is the label to automatically backport to the 8./d branch. /d is the digit.
• backport-8.x is the label to automatically backport to the 8.x branch.
• If no backport is necessary, please add the backport-skip label

[elastic-sonarqube]

Quality Gate passed

Issues
0 New issues
0 Fixed issues
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
No data about Coverage
No data about Duplication

See analysis details on SonarQube

[elasticmachine]

💚 Build Succeeded

• Buildkite Build
• Commit: bc80b13

[donoghuc]

Not quite following... Is elastic-transport not specifying a dependency correctly? Not sure why bundler would not be providing >= 2 if its a dependency?

[donoghuc]

It seems like if elastic-transport requires faraday ~> 2 that gem should be specifying that.

[mashhurs]

After 🚶‍♂️, I was questioning myself why faraday-v1 was consumed in 9.0?! I found reason that I didn't remove faraday (~> 1) here 🤦 .
So, this change is unnecessary now. I have checked in 8.x branches as well that all consuming faraday-v2.
I will close this.

[mashhurs]

Closing as it is not necessary, see details