Unknown setting 'discovery.zen.minimum_master_nodes' in elasticsearch testcontainer 8.x #228

I am trying to start the testcontainers with a new 8.x elasticsearch image with testcontainers 3.6.0.
However, the container quits immediately, and I cannot execute any tests.

I found out that the discovery.zen.* settings are no longer supported and will cause the container to quit now. ES 8 breaking changes

java.lang.IllegalArgumentException: unknown setting [discovery.zen.minimum_master_nodes] please check that any required plugins are installed, or check the breaking changes documentation for removed settings

Also, the check if the container is up will not work properly. I assume this is because Elasticsearch will use https now by default. I did not find anything in the changelogs, but there is a comment in the Java testcontainers here [ElasticsearchContainer.java] "major version 8 is secure by default" (https://github.com/testcontainers/testcontainers-java/blob/84d3444600aaeeac6813505fe5bfbf9ffce760ef/modules/elasticsearch/src/main/java/org/testcontainers/elasticsearch/ElasticsearchContainer.java#L178)

Here is the error message that I get.

received plaintext http traffic on an https channel, closing connection Netty4HttpChannel{localAddress=/10.199.0.2:9200, remoteAddress=/10.199.0.1:47096

In order for the container to start, I need to change the environment variables as follows:

This does not work

from testcontainers.elasticsearch import ElasticSearchContainer

es = ElasticSearchContainer(image=f"elasticsearch:8.3.2")

try:
    es.start()
finally:
    es.stop()

If I remove the environment variable, this code works

from testcontainers.elasticsearch import ElasticSearchContainer

es = ElasticSearchContainer(image=f"elasticsearch:8.3.2") \
    .with_env("xpack.security.enabled", "false")

es.env.pop('discovery.zen.minimum_master_nodes')

try:
    es.start()
finally:
    es.stop()

I could prepare a Pull Request in which I check whether the version of the container is 8 or higher and set the environment variables accordingly. Does this sound like the correct approach?