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
Some content on the website seems a bit out of date #4092
Comments
@open-telemetry/java-instrumentation-approvers @open-telemetry/java-approvers please take a look |
@open-telemetry/java-instrumentation-approvers did we auto-generate that list once upon a time? I'm guessing it wasn't hand edited.....was it? |
supported-libraries seems hand edited and should probably be migrated to the https://opentelemetry.io/ website. @steverao Don't hesitate to create PRs to improve the documentation and suggests automatic checks if it would be possible without too much effort. |
I think whether we don't provide the table here in the future, and add instrumentation name in supported tables. The final result is similar to the picture below: |
@steverao You seem to suggest to add a new column with the automatic instrumentation name to the instrumentation libraries table. Generally, if a user has configured the OpenTelemetry Java agent, then he does not need instrumentation libraries. So, it may make sense to document the instrumentation of the Java agent and the instrumentation libraries on different pages, and to create a new page for the instrumentation libraries on the https://opentelemetry.io/ website.
disabled-instrumentations does not seem documented on the https://opentelemetry.io/ website. The https://opentelemetry.io/docs/languages/java/automatic/configuration/ should probably be updated. |
In addition, I would sugest to add the framework links and a @steverao and @open-telemetry/java-instrumentation-approvers WDYT? |
Yes, my idea is to add new column in supported tables. Just maintain one table, it won't miss to update information when someone adds a new instrumentation to code repo(Solution 1). |
Just to throw this in as a perspective from docs: We should aim to have material on opentelemetry.io to be the source of truth, and (if possible) not the repositories, especially for those end-user facing details. We have way to many documentation fragmented across the individual repositories making it really hard for end-users to find the things they need. If this is a workflow issues ("it won't miss to update information when someone adds a new instrumentation to code repo"), we should address this as such and collaborate on a solution. This can reach from a metadata file stored in the repository that we pull from OR (my preferred solution) this details become part of the registry entries per instrumentation library (see https://github.com/open-telemetry/opentelemetry.io/blob/main/data/registry/instrumentation-java-apache-httpclient.yml and https://opentelemetry.io/ecosystem/registry/?language=java&component=instrumentation), which eventually would us even allow to make this data searchable via the Registry. |
Yep, I think there's a technical solution we can employ to keep stuff always up to date. Copying data from the repos got us pretty far for now but for stuff like this we should use a path that's largely automated by the bots. |
So, it seems also to make sense for the doc approvers to move the list of instrumentation libraries to the website. It could be done with one PR. The documentation of each instrumenation libraries could perhaps be moved with other PRs. The next question seems to be: should we have one table for the instrumentations of the Java agent and another one for the instrumentation libraries, or only one table? As I mentioned before, I would prefer two tables from a user perspective:
I will add the question about one or two tables to the agenda of the OTel Java SIG today. Today, the Java agent has many instrumentations ar there are many instrumentation libraries. It seems to have became not frequent to add a new instrumentation to the Java agent or a new instrumentation library. So, about the documentation maintenance, I would suggest to fix the current inconsistencies (see #4092 (comment)), and and to see over time if other inconsistencies are frequently introduced. |
@steverao The topic has been discussed in the last Java SIG. It has been suggested to:
@open-telemetry/docs-approvers Where would you recommend placing the table of the Java instrumentation libraries on the website? |
To sum up the shorty-term improvements discussed:
@steverao If you would be interested in creating doc PRs to address these points, that would be great contributions useful for the OpenTelemetry users. |
The time of Java SIG meeting starts at one o'clock in the morning in my country, so It's hard for me to attend the last meeting:( I saw the replay and agree with that decision. Please assign the issue to me, I will finish it in this week. |
@steverao Indeed, it's very late for you. Thank you for your help! |
There are 2 pieces for me:
|
A related suggestion: open-telemetry/opentelemetry-collector-contrib#24189 |
What happened? Describe the problem that occurred.
I found Suppressing specific agent instrumentation in website is inconsistent with the latest supported-libraries.
There are some problems I think maybe we need to solve them:
Alibaba Druid
andMyBatis
in supported-libraries, but they can't find in Suppressing specific agent instrumentation.Apache Cassandra
, but its name isCassandra Driver
in supported-libraries.What did you expect would happen? Describe the expected result/output.
How to update the website document before? Whether we should come up with a method ensure that both parties can be consistent in a timely so that similar problems will not continue to occur?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: