-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 440
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
Mark SdkMeter as pub(crate) #2113
Mark SdkMeter as pub(crate) #2113
Conversation
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #2113 +/- ##
=======================================
- Coverage 78.3% 78.3% -0.1%
=======================================
Files 121 121
Lines 20815 20815
=======================================
- Hits 16309 16308 -1
- Misses 4506 4507 +1 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This is a breaking change so maybe a change note?
+1. We also need to add one for #2085 too |
Merging. Missing changelogs can be added in a follow up for both together. |
Can i get a rational on this? Perhaps I am missing some context. Is it because users should use a builder and not the SdkMeter directly? |
From the examples:
// OR
SdkMeter not required to do this, and OTel's expectation is also rely on API only, not SDK constructs like SdkMeter, as that would tie their instrumentation to a specific SDK implementation (negating one of the original goals of OTel). I also look at this from another angle - some pub thing was removed, and still all examples continue to compile, indicating that this should not have been public in the first place. Should work most of the time to help clean up public APIs to the absolute minimum required. |
Changes
SdkMeter
should not bepublic
Merge requirement checklist
CHANGELOG.md
files updated for non-trivial, user-facing changes