Rename Span Event name to short_name #153
Closed
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This is part of the alignment effort defined here open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#622 The comment added clarifies the semantics, but I believe this is compatible with our previous understanding and doe not change that understanding. This does not break the protocol since renaming the fields does not change the wire format.
tigrannajaryan
requested review from
arminru,
bogdandrutu,
c24t,
carlosalberto,
iredelmeier,
jmacd,
reyang,
SergeyKanzhelev,
tedsuo and
yurishkuro
as code owners
|
IMHO we should rather strive to keep span name and event name aligned than log name and event name. Related open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#557 |
|
I think I agree with you. I am not sure my original proposal is the right one. Perhaps |
|
Closing this for now. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This is part of the alignment effort defined here open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#622
The comment added clarifies the semantics, but I believe this is compatible
with our previous understanding and doe not change that understanding.
This does not break the protocol since renaming the fields does not change
the wire format.