Skip to content

This issue was moved to a discussion.

You can continue the conversation there. Go to discussion →

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

[Discussion] Use of "OTel native" or "native" referring to OpenTelemetry #3791

Closed
theletterf opened this issue Jan 17, 2024 · 7 comments
Closed
Labels
discussion Input from everyone is helpful to drive this forward docs

Comments

@theletterf
Copy link
Member

theletterf commented Jan 17, 2024

We've around 230+ hits for "native" in our docs. It usually refers to native instrumentation, schemas, and so on.

I'd like to suggest that we come up with a new term and edit the docs accordingly. The term could be:

  • OTel-ready
  • OTel compatible
  • Or just "OTel" as an adjective when we talk about specs or schemas.

I think "native" might mean lots of things that are unrelated to technical aspects, so I'd rather go with "OTel-ready" or "OTel compatible", as boring as they might sound. That has the added benefit that one knows what the thing is native about.

+CC @svrnm

@theletterf theletterf added the bug Something isn't working label Jan 17, 2024
@svrnm svrnm changed the title [Meta] Use of "OTel native" or "native" referring to OpenTelemetry [Discussion] Use of "OTel native" or "native" referring to OpenTelemetry Jan 17, 2024
@svrnm svrnm added docs discussion Input from everyone is helpful to drive this forward and removed bug Something isn't working labels Jan 17, 2024
@svrnm
Copy link
Member

svrnm commented Jan 17, 2024

cc @open-telemetry/docs-approvers

I like this proposal, although I like to iterate over the exact terminology a little bit. What we want to express is "this library makes use of the OpenTelemetry API directly, there are no instrumentation libraries or any other workarounds needed".

I also wonder if we need to make this specific to libraries, because right now we also have apps that use OpenTelemetry "natively".

@svrnm
Copy link
Member

svrnm commented Jan 17, 2024

A few additional suggestions:

  • OpenTelemetry integrated
  • OpenTelemetry enabled
  • OpenTelemetry compliant (I would rather not use that one, because it implies some additional checks & "certifications")
  • OpenTelemetry prepared
  • OpenTelemetry included
  • OpenTelemetry integrated
  • OpenTelemetry built-in (see https://opentelemetry.io/community/mission/#telemetry-should-be-built-in)
  • OpenTelemetry inside (...)

@chalin
Copy link
Contributor

chalin commented Jan 17, 2024

Btw, just a suggestion: we could host discussions under the Discussions section of this repo :). That would help keep discussion topics out of our already-busy Issues list.

@svrnm
Copy link
Member

svrnm commented Jan 17, 2024

Btw, just a suggestion: we could host discussions under the Discussions section of this repo :). That would help keep discussion topics out of our already-busy Issues list.

There was some guidance in the otel community repo on when to use discussions and when not, let me double check on that, but overall I agree that we might use that instead of additional issues

@theletterf
Copy link
Member Author

TIL! I'll use Discussions from now on.

@svrnm
Copy link
Member

svrnm commented Jan 17, 2024

via https://github.com/open-telemetry/community/blob/main/docs/how-to-configure-new-repository.md:

A note on discussions: Discussions are disabled by default when creating a new repository. Maintainers may enable discussions, but in doing so take on the responsibility of moderating conversations in accordance with the code of conduct. Maintainers who enable discussions are encouraged to configure the discussion categories to suit their needs, e.g. by removing categories which overlap with issues.

@cartermp
Copy link
Contributor

I would vote for otel-integrated.

@open-telemetry open-telemetry locked and limited conversation to collaborators Jan 18, 2024
@svrnm svrnm converted this issue into discussion #3808 Jan 18, 2024

This issue was moved to a discussion.

You can continue the conversation there. Go to discussion →

Labels
discussion Input from everyone is helpful to drive this forward docs
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants