Marc Alff

How is this different from `OTEL_EXPORTER_OTLP_INSECURE` ?

I very much support the idea of a yaml file. On top of all the benefits already mentioned, there is another one which is critical in my opinion: The status...

> Is there any change to include this PR into next release? Hi @owent. Going though the code review, and I would like to include it in the next release...

> Sorry for requesting change. This is for - [#3041 (comment)](https://github.com/open-telemetry/opentelemetry-cpp/pull/3041#discussion_r1802438616) > > If we are agreeing to not being ABI compliant when using OTLP/gRPC exporter, it would be better...

Ping @lalitb . Issue with ABSEIL and ABI is resolved, please take another look.

Thanks for the report. Please clarify: * How metrics are instrumented: sync or async metrics * What kind of metrics are used: counters, histograms, ... * whether no / a...

When 2 different symbols in semantic conventions generate the same symbol on the generated code, that is, when there is a collision, one of the name mapping has to change,...

> Another point that in this specific case: The new attribute `messaging.client.id` needs to produce a breaking change. It will not. Existing code using `MESSAGING_CLIENT_ID` or `MessagingClientId`, corresponding to `messaging.client_id`,...

See my previous comment: > When 2 different symbols in semantic conventions generate the same symbol on the generated code, > that is, when there is a collision, one of...

> Here's more details on the Option 3.5: > > * allow collisions between deprecated and non-deprecated attributes, ignoring deprecated. > I don't understand how this would work, what is...