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

[metric spec review] Incorrect API tsdoc Inputs MAY/MUST not be negative #3391

Closed
dyladan opened this issue Nov 7, 2022 · 1 comment · Fixed by #3396
Closed

[metric spec review] Incorrect API tsdoc Inputs MAY/MUST not be negative #3391

dyladan opened this issue Nov 7, 2022 · 1 comment · Fixed by #3396
Labels
api:metrics Issues and PRs related to the Metrics API document Documentation-related
Milestone

Comments

@dyladan
Copy link
Member

dyladan commented Nov 7, 2022

    Nit: not part of the spec compliance review but I noticed this comment:

* Increment value of counter by the input. Inputs may not be negative.

Do we want Inputs may not be negative. or Inputs must not be negative.? (if we look at histogram, it is using the must wording

* Records a measurement. Value of the measurement must not be negative.
)

Originally posted by @reyang in open-telemetry/community#1204 (comment)

@dyladan dyladan changed the title [metric spec review] 3 [metric spec review] tsdoc Inputs MAY/MUST not be negative Nov 7, 2022
@dyladan dyladan changed the title [metric spec review] tsdoc Inputs MAY/MUST not be negative [metric spec review] Incorrect API tsdoc Inputs MAY/MUST not be negative Nov 7, 2022
@dyladan dyladan added this to the Metrics GA milestone Nov 7, 2022
@dyladan dyladan added document Documentation-related api:metrics Issues and PRs related to the Metrics API labels Nov 7, 2022
@legendecas
Copy link
Member

Quick fix: #3396

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
api:metrics Issues and PRs related to the Metrics API document Documentation-related
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants