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

Propagators section clean up #453

Open
carlosalberto opened this issue Feb 10, 2020 · 3 comments
Open

Propagators section clean up #453

carlosalberto opened this issue Feb 10, 2020 · 3 comments
Assignees
Labels
area:api Cross language API specification issue release:after-ga Not required before GA release, and not going to work on before GA spec:context Related to the specification/context directory
Milestone

Comments

@carlosalberto
Copy link
Contributor

In #440 a few issues arose about the overall structure and current content of api-propagators.md:

  • We should define, earlier in the documentation, the Carrier interface, and mention it is mutable.
  • Add the notion of Format as a representation of the restrictions that a given message transport imposes on the data, and avoid the term formatter.
  • Add the notion of "Application Message" that semantically consists of metadata (e.g. HTTP headers) and the payload.
  • The Fields section needs to be clearer and not part of the HttpFormat
  • Do we really need to separate Carrier and Setter (and maybe Getter)?
@yurishkuro
Copy link
Member

add: having only Get in the Getter is incompatible with OpenTracing, e.g. Jaeger's baggage cannot be retrieved via Get because the headers include the user's baggage key, e.g. uberctx-myBaggageKey.

@bogdandrutu bogdandrutu modified the milestones: v0.5, v0.4 Feb 13, 2020
@Oberon00
Copy link
Member

Oberon00 commented Feb 14, 2020

Do we really need to separate Carrier and Setter (and maybe Getter)?

We don't need to, but it allows using a singleton object for getter/setter and an already existing object for carrier instead of creating a new combined object just for telemetry. However, I think the carrier should be an optional (i.e. nullable) argument.

@bogdandrutu bogdandrutu modified the milestones: v0.4, v0.5 May 12, 2020
@carlosalberto carlosalberto modified the milestones: v0.5, v0.6 Jun 9, 2020
@arminru arminru added the spec:context Related to the specification/context directory label Jun 9, 2020
@bogdandrutu bogdandrutu added the area:api Cross language API specification issue label Jun 26, 2020
@carlosalberto carlosalberto added the release:required-for-ga Must be resolved before GA release, or nice to have before GA label Jul 2, 2020
@carlosalberto carlosalberto added the priority:p1 Highest priority level label Jul 24, 2020
@andrewhsu
Copy link
Member

Talking with @carlosalberto today, looks like only thing left from the description of this issue is:

  • Add the notion of "Application Message" that semantically consists of metadata (e.g. HTTP headers) and the payload.

So bumping this down to P3.

@andrewhsu andrewhsu added priority:p3 Lowest priority level and removed priority:p1 Highest priority level labels Sep 3, 2020
@arminru arminru added release:after-ga Not required before GA release, and not going to work on before GA and removed priority:p3 Lowest priority level release:required-for-ga Must be resolved before GA release, or nice to have before GA labels Sep 25, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
area:api Cross language API specification issue release:after-ga Not required before GA release, and not going to work on before GA spec:context Related to the specification/context directory
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

6 participants