-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 849
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
Added info what are the new semantic attributes to be used #4840
Conversation
Codecov ReportBase: 90.79% // Head: 90.79% // No change to project coverage 👍
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #4840 +/- ##
=========================================
Coverage 90.79% 90.79%
Complexity 4844 4844
=========================================
Files 555 555
Lines 14438 14438
Branches 1405 1405
=========================================
Hits 13109 13109
Misses 910 910
Partials 419 419 Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here. ☔ View full report at Codecov. |
@@ -166,13 +166,13 @@ public final class {{class}} { | |||
public static final AttributeKey<String> HTTP_HOST = stringKey("http.host"); | |||
|
|||
/** | |||
* @deprecated This item has been removed as of 1.13.0 of the semantic conventions. | |||
* @deprecated This item has been removed as of 1.13.0 of the semantic conventions. Please use {@link SemanticAttributes.NET_SOCK_PEER_ADDR} instead. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yeah, it's a sticky wicket, isn't it. I don't particularly like that the spec doesn't deprecate but relies on the usage of the schema, which I'm sure no one actually uses. :(
Is there any harm in keeping these around longer?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Is there any harm in keeping these around longer?
AFAIK no, not really. I think we could keep them for a bit longer if it makes it easier for people to migrate off of them; we're certainly no longer using these in the instrumentation repo.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Two versions? Three versions?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
no idea. Let's raise it as a topic at the Thursday meeting.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
added to agenda
@marcingrzejszczak are you able to run the code generator as well, to get the actual java files up to date? |
Updated the code after running the code generator |
Related change - open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification@0b45213