Jack Berg

I ran this in debug mode. The [fast path](https://github.com/protocolbuffers/protobuf-go/blob/5aec41b4809b9822a34e17acd06ae9ae9f41c13d/proto/size.go#L34) @a-feld mentioned doesn't called because there's logic which normalizes proto v1 and v2 messages as v2 messages. The the otel protos...

> I can't tell on github, but does this end up with overlapping package names with the module you moved stuff from? We need to make sure they both export...

> > > Tracing doesn't, but IIRC correctly there's a reason for that 🤔 that we've previously discussed. > > > > maybe to keep trace context propagation enabled even...

I thought I commented on this, but this seems like a good idea to me.

Resolved in #4675.

Hey @jkwatson - wondering what your thoughts are about trying to get this in before the 1.17.0 release. It technically depends on this [spec PR](https://github.com/open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification/pull/2681), but I think its extremely...

This [text](https://github.com/open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification/blame/main/specification/context/api-propagators.md#L350-L352) from the spec seems pretty unambiguous about this propagator not belonging in the core repo: > Additional `Propagator`s implementing vendor-specific protocols such as AWS X-Ray trace header protocol...

Yes. And for stable artifacts we would have to continue to publish the old coordinates until a 2.0.0 release. Alpha artifacts don't have the same restriction, and if moved would...

@rapphil it depends on where they move. Artifacts in `opentelemetry-java` have a package prefix of `io.opentelemetry`. Artifacts in `opentelemetry-java-instrumentation` have a package prefix of `io.opentelemetry.instrumentation`. Artifacts in `opentelemetry-java-contrib` have a...

On the subject of the micrometer shim: I think we should be stricter and exclude components from here unless they are explicitly spec'd. I know we made an exception for...