opentelemetry.io
opentelemetry.io copied to clipboard
Consistent naming?
What needs to be changed?
The current docs seem to use inconsistent names for different language clients.
For example:




Making it worse, the website is also different from the official project:


What is the name + path of the page that needs changed?
Almost all the docs under https://github.com/open-telemetry/opentelemetry.io/tree/main/content/en/docs/instrumentation
Good callout @reyang +1 on maintaining consistent naming.
Thanks for bringing this up, @reyang! I am not sure if this is a sole issue for the website or for all the SIGs as well (as you called out there are differences in the repo names as well). I raised a similar topic a while back rg. the auto instrumentation where we have a similar situation: https://github.com/open-telemetry/opentelemetry.io/issues/1689
We fixed that for a few of the language index pages via this PR: https://github.com/open-telemetry/opentelemetry.io/pull/1732
Not sure if this is a decision we can solely make from the website?
Not sure if this is a decision we can solely make from the website?
Aha, I don't know! That's why I raised this issue to test the water 🤣🤣🤣
We can certainly standardize on naming on the website, but yeah, this might be a "each SIG decides what the name is" sorta deal. Which would then lead to inconsistent naming for sure. Ah, bikesheds.
Please see my lengthy comment here: https://github.com/open-telemetry/opentelemetry.io/issues/1689#issuecomment-1257698064
For the initial question, I think it should be "OpenTelemetry for <Language>"? That's at least what most language pages have (especially due to #1732, where we started to use the same text for most language pages).
Agreed.
For the initial question, I think it should be "OpenTelemetry for
<Language>"? That's at least what most language pages have (especially due to #1732, where we started to use the same text for most language pages).
"For" could be confusing for clients that are targeting more than the programming language. For example:
- "OpenTelemetry for Java" sounds like it is for Java, although it can be used by Scala or any other languages targeting JVM.
- "OpenTelemetry for JavaScript" sounds like it is for JavaScript, however it can be used by TypeScript/CoffeeScript/etc.
That's a point against "for" indeed. Not that I would rule it out because of that but maybe we can do better, so what are the alternatives we have?
- OpenTelemetry for C++, OpenTelemetry for Rust
- OpenTelemetry Java, OpenTelemetry JavaScript
- OpenTelemetry in .NET, OpenTelemetry in Python
- OpenTelemetry Go SDK, OpenTelemetry Ruby SDK (and ... API, etc.)
Maybe we can collect feedback here - vote with emoji:
- ❤️ OpenTelemetry C++, OpenTelemetry Rust, OpenTelemetry Java, OpenTelemetry JavaScript, OpenTelemetry .NET, OpenTelemetry Python, OpenTelemetry Go, OpenTelemetry Ruby
- 🎉 OpenTelemetry in C++, OpenTelemetry in Rust, OpenTelemetry in Java, OpenTelemetry in JavaScript, OpenTelemetry in .NET, OpenTelemetry in Python, OpenTelemetry in Go, OpenTelemetry in Ruby
- 🚀 OpenTelemetry for C++, OpenTelemetry for Rust, OpenTelemetry for Java, OpenTelemetry for JavaScript, OpenTelemetry for .NET, OpenTelemetry for Python, OpenTelemetry for Go, OpenTelemetry for Ruby
So, we have a strong preference for "OpenTelemetry <Language>"?
We can change that throughout the docs, but for consistency we should also have the same for the individual repos, and I think that's something that needs to be discussed via open-telemetry/community?
We can change that throughout the docs, but for consistency we should also have the same for the individual repos, and I think that's something that needs to be discussed via open-telemetry/community?
I've reached out to several groups on Slack gathering feedback:
- OpenTelemetry Maintainers https://cloud-native.slack.com/archives/C01NJ7V1KRC/p1664914229223519
- OpenTelemetry Community https://cloud-native.slack.com/archives/CJFCJHG4Q/p1664914268959639
- OpenTelemetry Demo https://cloud-native.slack.com/archives/C03B4CWV4DA/p1664914257596769
@reyang Could we also try consistently naming the "auto-instrumentation" repositories or is it too much for this issue?
Current state:
- OpenTelemetry Instrumentation for Java
- OpenTelemetry .NET Automatic Instrumentation
- OpenTelemetry auto-instrumentation extension
Proposals:
- ❤️ OpenTelemetry ABC Auto-Instrumentation OR OpenTelemetry Auto-Instrumentation for ABC
- 🎉 OpenTelemetry ABC Automatic Instrumentation OR OpenTelemetry Automatic Instrumentation for ABC
- 🚀 OpenTelemetry ABC Instrumentation OR OpenTelemetry Instrumentation for ABC
Some of the modules released as part of https://github.com/open-telemetry/opentelemetry-java-instrumentation are not really automatic instrumentation: these library instrumentations have to be added as a dependency, and then configured and installed into the instrumented framework by the user. If possible, I'd refrain from renaming the repo to "auto-instrumentation"
@pellared , @mateuszrzeszutek I would prefer to have this in a separate issue, because this is a much more complicated case (see also the discussion at #1689). A layer of complexity that you called out, @mateuszrzeszutek, is that the content of the opentelemetry-
Getting back here, https://github.com/open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification/pull/2867 is merged. Thanks everyone who contributed to the discussion and shared your opinions/votes.
@svrnm FYI I've done some grunt work to align the existing projects:
- https://github.com/open-telemetry/opentelemetry-php/pull/847
- https://github.com/open-telemetry/opentelemetry-java/pull/4871
I'll keep this issue open since there are still several places in the docs where we need to address.
@reyang thanks for filing. I believe this can now be closed since all language index pages use the same pattern for the name.