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

Publish OpenTelemetry Schema File 1.6.1 #695

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Aug 30, 2021

Conversation

carlosalberto
Copy link
Contributor

Also retire the broken 1.6.0 schema.

Also retire the broken 1.6.0 schema.
@carlosalberto
Copy link
Contributor Author

@open-telemetry/docs-approvers please review this.

Copy link
Member

@austinlparker austinlparker left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

lgtm

@austinlparker austinlparker merged commit 4e0bbc9 into open-telemetry:main Aug 30, 2021
@@ -1,6 +0,0 @@
file_format: 1.0.0
Copy link
Contributor

@chalin chalin Sep 7, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@austinlparker @carlosalberto - just curious: is there an issue here for folks attempting to access 1.6.0 and getting a 404?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

My guess is that we either want to preserve all version files "forever", or introduce appropriate redirect rules. But I could be wrong. @tigrannajaryan WDYT?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

For my own reference, here's a link to the schema doc I found: https://github.com/open-telemetry/oteps/blob/main/text/0152-telemetry-schemas.md. (I don't know if this OTEP is superseded by some other doc once the proposal is approved.)

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is file_format which is different from and unrelated to schema versions, which are listed in the versions section. file_format MUST be 1.0.0 for now. file_format may change in the future only if we amend the schema file format itself via a new OTEP which introduces new capabilities in the schema files.

Unlike file_format, a new schema version is introduced every time we make a specification release. We are currently on 1.6.1 of specification and of the schema. 1.6.0 was a broken release and because of that it is not listed in the schema files as if 1.6.0 never happened.

Copy link
Contributor

@chalin chalin Sep 7, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I wasn't commenting on the file_format line, I was just attaching my comment to the deleted file static/schemas/1.6.0 -- sorry if that wasn't clear.

1.6.0 was a broken release and because of that it is not listed in the schema files as if 1.6.0 never happened.

That answers my question, thanks.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Actually, I have a followup question: is there a problem if the content of these two directories drift apart?

Should 1.6.0 be deleted from opentelemetry-specification/schemas too, "as if it never happened"?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Should 1.6.0 be deleted from opentelemetry-specification/schemas too, "as if it never happened"?

Good catch. Yes, it should be deleted.

The content of the directories should be in sync and I plan to add an action that syncs the content automatically.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The ideal situation is to avoid having the same files in two repos. I've opened #709 to track this issue and discussion.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants