add scope schema URL and attributes to prom attributes
Reference implementation: https://github.com/open-telemetry/opentelemetry-go/pull/5947
Towards https://github.com/open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification/issues/4223
Codecov Report
All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests :white_check_mark:
Project coverage is 89.90%. Comparing base (
f2f29f5) to head (2edc05f). Report is 54 commits behind head on main.
Additional details and impacted files
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #7356 +/- ##
============================================
+ Coverage 89.77% 89.90% +0.13%
- Complexity 6982 7011 +29
============================================
Files 797 798 +1
Lines 21160 21219 +59
Branches 2056 2056
============================================
+ Hits 18996 19078 +82
+ Misses 1503 1484 -19
+ Partials 661 657 -4
:umbrella: View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
:loudspeaker: Have feedback on the report? Share it here.
:rocket: New features to boost your workflow:
- :snowflake: Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
@zeitlinger, FYI. From https://github.com/open-telemetry/opentelemetry-go/pull/5947#issuecomment-290203538:
SIG meeting: We agreed that this can be merged before updating the spec given we have a preliminary consent with OTel-Prometheus SIG and both exporter and spec are "development".
@zeitlinger, FYI: open-telemetry/opentelemetry-go#5947 (comment)
from that comment
SIG meeting: We agreed that this can be merged before updating the spec given we have a preliminary consent with OTel-Prometheus SIG and both exporter and spec are "development".
This is just a heads-up that the spec change this PR addresses has already been approved and is about to be merged! So you're good to proceed.
If removing the otel_scope_info metric is a breaking change for your SDK, you're empowered to decide how to roll this out!
If removing the otel_scope_info metric is a breaking change for your SDK, you're empowered to decide how to roll this out!
This is not part of this PR - will discuss first how to address this
@jack-berg can you take a look?
@jack-berg please check again