-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 896
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 the name used for Lightstep's (ot-tracer-*) propagator #1391
Comments
/cc @yurishkuro @tedsuo @carlosalberto as experts in OpenTracing. |
|
Conventionally the |
Users wanting to deploy new services using OpenTelemetry who have previously instrumented w/ OpenTracing, but aren't interested in updating their existing services.
Happy to change it based on the conclusion of the discussion here. |
I recommend
|
sgtm |
I agree this form is called "basic tracer" from OpenTelemetry.
@yurishkuro and @austinlparker what do you think? For the record, Lightstep has a distinct single-header base64-encoded-protobuf representation of the OpenTracing "basic tracer" information, but that form is not the subject of this PR. |
What does adding it to ot-shim entail? |
I think that means requiring it to be implemented as part of an on-spec OpenTracing bridge? |
I don't think it needs to be in the shim or required. Basic tracer repos had explicit warning "sample implementation, not for production use". To my knowledge, they all had no trace export format, just in-memory collection. But it's fine to have the propagator in contrib for people who ignored that warning and used basic tracer in prod. |
Agreed, it doesn't need to become part of the shim. |
Currently in some repos this propagator is called
OpenTracingPropogator
in others is calledOtPropagator
. Couple suggestions:LightstepPropagator
, since this is not the official OpenTracing propagator (or maybe I am wrong, but if that is the case then we need to probably add it to the ot-shim).The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: