You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Since #1534 / #1472, we pass on invalid (i.e. null/empty) instrumentation library names to the exporter. We should specify how specific exporters should deal with it. In my opinion, the goal should be to alert users that they are making a mistake when they decline (not forget: the null/empty string has to be explicitly passed) to specify an instrumentation library name. So I would suggest:
OTLP: Probably pass it on as-is, but add SHOULD/MUST-requirement for consumers (e.g. collector when translating to other protocol) to alert users somehow.
Jaeger/Zipkin: Replace with "<INSTRUMENTATION LIBRARY NAME MISSING>" or similarly screaming string.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Jaeger has no requirements on instrumentation library name, it only requires service name. I assume the same holds for Zipkin. So I am not clear what value a long screaming string would provide. I would simply omit setting this on the spans.
Jaeger has no requirements on instrumentation library name,
But OpenTelemetry has. And in #1534 / #1472 it was decided that the backend is responsible for showing the error message to the user. Since I don't think Jaeger/Zipkin will add special support for the OTel library names, the last point in the chain where we can add the error message is the exporter.
So I am not clear what value a long screaming string would provide.
It will urge users to put in place an instrumentation library name, therefore stop calling the OpenTelemetry getTracer API with invalid arguments.
backend is responsible for showing the error message to the user
I don't think this is stated anywhere as a requirement. Most users won't even care about this value, I think the main persona who cares is someone who's investigating instrumentation issues, and for them the absence of this value tells as much as a long screaming string.
Since #1534 / #1472, we pass on invalid (i.e. null/empty) instrumentation library names to the exporter. We should specify how specific exporters should deal with it. In my opinion, the goal should be to alert users that they are making a mistake when they decline (not forget: the null/empty string has to be explicitly passed) to specify an instrumentation library name. So I would suggest:
"<INSTRUMENTATION LIBRARY NAME MISSING>"
or similarly screaming string.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: