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

Update and delete conventions following spec #684

Conversation

joaothallis
Copy link

@tsloughter
Copy link
Member

Cool. Was this done with the generation script?

The app version would need to change too.

But I think this upgrade in semconv is still blocked for us by http stuff. @bryannaegele ?

I should probably try to knock that out before I start working again so we can upgrade semconv...

Copy link

codecov bot commented Feb 7, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 74.35%. Comparing base (275ebaf) to head (5baca90).
Report is 11 commits behind head on main.

Current head 5baca90 differs from pull request most recent head 08b4791

Please upload reports for the commit 08b4791 to get more accurate results.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #684      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   73.13%   74.35%   +1.21%     
==========================================
  Files          64       56       -8     
  Lines        1943     1852      -91     
==========================================
- Hits         1421     1377      -44     
+ Misses        522      475      -47     
Flag Coverage Δ
api 73.14% <ø> (+3.24%) ⬆️
elixir ?
erlang 74.35% <ø> (-0.11%) ⬇️
exporter 67.47% <ø> (-5.11%) ⬇️
sdk 78.69% <ø> (+1.38%) ⬆️
zipkin 54.16% <ø> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@joaothallis
Copy link
Author

Cool. Was this done with the generation script?

No, I applied the changes manually verifying the spec. Is that this script?

@bryannaegele
Copy link
Contributor

But I think this upgrade in semconv is still blocked for us by http stuff. @bryannaegele ?

We still have to implement the env var checking. I don't know how we're going to deal with the new plus old. I threw out running the script, diffing, and adding deprecated stuff but that had a host of problems.

I know this is still an issue the wg knows of in general with no progress as yet. I think there are several other sigs frustrated by it.

@tsloughter
Copy link
Member

Ugh, we have got to do something about being stuck on old semconv. Next time we meet, @bryannaegele , lets be sure to write up a detailed issue and I'll do my best to knock it out. I keep losing context on the issue and feeling like I have to start over figuring out just what to do.

@bryannaegele
Copy link
Contributor

@joaothallis this is being addressed in #733

@joaothallis joaothallis deleted the change/rename-and-delete-conventions branch June 5, 2024 01:47
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants