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

Release stable version of opentelemetry-instrumentation-api #2892

Closed
trask opened this issue Apr 29, 2021 · 9 comments · Fixed by #6566
Closed

Release stable version of opentelemetry-instrumentation-api #2892

trask opened this issue Apr 29, 2021 · 9 comments · Fixed by #6566

Comments

@trask
Copy link
Member

trask commented Apr 29, 2021

This is a tracking issue for releasing stable version of the opentelemetry-instrumentation-api artifact.

Will post updates from time to time on this issue for anyone who wants to watch/follow it.

You may also be interested in following #2713 which is the current major work in progress towards this goal.

In the meantime, if you require a stable artifact, we recommend using opentelemetry-api directly, or shading opentelemetry-instrumentation-api.

@trask
Copy link
Member Author

trask commented Jun 6, 2021

I realized, another gate on a stable release of the opentelemetry-instrumentation-api is a stable release of the semantic conventions

@trask
Copy link
Member Author

trask commented Oct 3, 2021

Something else to consider is whether to wait for otel-wide spec of "instrumentation api" (discussion at open-telemetry/oteps#165)

@mateuszrzeszutek
Copy link
Member

Just a thought that occurred to me: we could mark the packages that depend on semantic conventions (...instrumenter.http, ...instrumenter.messaging et cetera) as @UnstableApi while making the general Instrumenter API stable. It limits the usability of the instrumenter-api (since you can still have breaking changes in your HTTP client instrumentation) but at least all the customization interfaces can be stable (so users of your HTTP client instrumentation can add AttributesExtractors without worrying that its interface will change).

@iNikem
Copy link
Contributor

iNikem commented Oct 4, 2021

Or just have all attributes extractor in a separate unstable module

@iNikem
Copy link
Contributor

iNikem commented Oct 4, 2021

But anyway I totally support the idea of somehow making possible to declare stable a subset of a module

@mateuszrzeszutek
Copy link
Member

Or just have all attributes extractor in a separate unstable module

We've already introduced @UnstableApi for metrics API, the semantic conventions situations is kind of similar to that.
But yeah, a separate module would be fine too.

@ThomasVitale
Copy link

Is it correct to follow the backlog in https://github.com/open-telemetry/opentelemetry-java-instrumentation/projects/10#card-70538476 to know what tasks are left to do before opentelemetry-instrumentation-api can go GA?

@iNikem
Copy link
Contributor

iNikem commented Jan 6, 2022

@ThomasVitale yes

@trask
Copy link
Member Author

trask commented Aug 8, 2022

for those watching this issue, we are planning for the next release of the opentelemetry-instrumentation-api (1.17.0) to be a Release Candidate

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
4 participants