Skip to content
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

Rename CorrelationContext to Baggage (again) #536

Closed
yurishkuro opened this issue Mar 31, 2020 · 5 comments · Fixed by #857
Closed

Rename CorrelationContext to Baggage (again) #536

yurishkuro opened this issue Mar 31, 2020 · 5 comments · Fixed by #857
Labels
area:api Cross language API specification issue priority:p2 Medium priority level release:required-for-ga Must be resolved before GA release, or nice to have before GA spec:baggage Related to the specification/baggage directory

Comments

@yurishkuro
Copy link
Member

The W3C WG is leaning towards changing the Correlation-Context header name to baggage (w3c/baggage#17).

What does this mean for OTel?

@dyladan
Copy link
Member

dyladan commented Mar 31, 2020

This should be closed by #517 no?

@yurishkuro
Copy link
Member Author

yurishkuro commented Mar 31, 2020

I think this is a longer-term question than #517. It is both about the header name and the API concept name. W3C WG members raised concerns with the naming "correlation" as confusing & conflicting with other usages of the word. On the other hand, W3C "baggage" is very much a mechanism for user-supplied data, while OTEP 66 did an about face at the last moment from general purpose k/v bag to a more vague "observability-related correlation labels":

While Correlations can be used to prototype other cross-cutting concerns, this
mechanism is primarily intended to convey values for the OpenTelemetry
observability systems.

For backwards compatibility, OpenTracing Baggage is propagated as Correlations
when using the OpenTracing bridge. New concerns with different criteria should
be modeled separately, using the same underlying context propagation layer as
building blocks.

So this ticket, to me, is about whether OTel is going to support true baggage (which also completely covers observability concerns), or continue drawing a distinction between real baggage an OTel Correlations (in which case it should not be using the w3c "baggage" header).

@jmacd
Copy link
Contributor

jmacd commented Apr 9, 2020

I think we should avoid figurative terms like "Baggage". The term itself is loaded with baggage at this point. How about calling this "User Data"?

@reyang reyang added area:api Cross language API specification issue release:required-for-ga Must be resolved before GA release, or nice to have before GA spec:baggage Related to the specification/baggage directory labels Jul 10, 2020
@bogdandrutu bogdandrutu added the priority:p1 Highest priority level label Jul 24, 2020
@andrewhsu andrewhsu added priority:p2 Medium priority level and removed priority:p1 Highest priority level labels Jul 28, 2020
@mtwo
Copy link
Member

mtwo commented Jul 28, 2020

While the W3C baggage draft needs to become a formal recommendation, the W3C committee believes that it is now ready for implementation. No additional changes are expected, though it is possible (yet unlikely) that changes will occur as the spec goes through the formal W3C review process.

Myself, @mwear , @dyladan , and @SergeyKanzhelev are on the W3C group.

@tsloughter
Copy link
Member

I think the W3C name should be stuck with to avoid confusion. If it is an implementation of W3C Baggage specification then it should be called "baggage".

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
area:api Cross language API specification issue priority:p2 Medium priority level release:required-for-ga Must be resolved before GA release, or nice to have before GA spec:baggage Related to the specification/baggage directory
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

8 participants