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

Clarify experimental additions to Stable components #597

Open
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

tigrannajaryan
Copy link
Member

The Entities SIG is planning a backward-compatible addition to the Resource, see the prototype here: tigrannajaryan#2

The change is compliant with existing stability requirements in this repository.

However, our stability definition does not specify how such experimental additions to stable signals are expected to be done and what happens during and after the experiment.

This PR adds more clarity in the process and further refines the stability definition to reinforce our strong commitment ot OTLP's stability.

The Entities SIG is planning a backward-compatible addition to the Resource,
see the prototype here: #2

The change is compliant with existing stability requirements in this repository.

However, our stability definition does not specify how such experimental additions
to stable signals are expected to be done and what happens during and after
the experiment.

This PR adds more clarity in the process and further refines the stability
definition to reinforce our strong commitment ot OTLP's stability.
README.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
README.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
tigrannajaryan added a commit to tigrannajaryan/opentelemetry-proto that referenced this pull request Nov 14, 2024
- Match the requirements defined in open-telemetry#597
- Use v1development instead of v1 to match what we do for profiles: https://github.com/open-telemetry/opentelemetry-proto/tree/main/opentelemetry/proto/profiles/v1development
@tigrannajaryan
Copy link
Member Author

As an example, here is the application of these rules to the Entities experimental signal: tigrannajaryan#2

@tigrannajaryan
Copy link
Member Author

@open-telemetry/spec-sponsors when you all get tired from walking the Kubecon floor please take a look at this PR :-)

Copy link

@feldentm-SAP feldentm-SAP left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

does it make sense to require some minimum progress to prevent piling up deprecated fields from failed experiments?

README.md Show resolved Hide resolved
@tigrannajaryan
Copy link
Member Author

@open-telemetry/technical-committee @open-telemetry/spec-sponsors please take a look.

@tigrannajaryan
Copy link
Member Author

does it make sense to require some minimum progress to prevent piling up deprecated fields from failed experiments?

Yes, that's implied. We will not be accepting experimental fields unless there is significant upfront work done that demonstrates how the field is supposed to work. An example of that is entities SIG's upcoming changes to the Resource. We have multiple prototypes in different languages and in the Collector already, but we were very careful and haven't made the proto field proposal yet. We want to have a high confidence level before the field is added.

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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

8 participants