-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.7k
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
Manage opentelemetry-semconv-incubating #42186
Manage opentelemetry-semconv-incubating #42186
Conversation
/cc @brunobat (opentelemetry), @radcortez (opentelemetry) |
Would you like to review @brunobat ? |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
Integration tests OTel failures seem suspicious. Rerunning... |
Status for workflow
|
Develocity marks them as flaky, does it not? |
Yes, but I just find it suspicious that the test failed for both 17 and 21, but I did see the same symptoms in another PR. I'll have a look. |
<exclusions> | ||
<exclusion> | ||
<groupId>io.opentelemetry</groupId> | ||
<artifactId>opentelemetry-bom</artifactId> | ||
</exclusion> | ||
<exclusion> | ||
<groupId>io.opentelemetry</groupId> | ||
<artifactId>opentelemetry-api</artifactId> | ||
</exclusion> | ||
</exclusions> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
With this, you do a bit more than adding something to the BOM as advertised in the title. Could you clarify?
I'm all for what you added below but not sure I would be comfortable merging the part above without having @brunobat checking as it's something that has been added explicitly.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
opentelemetry-semconv depends on neither opentelemetry-bom nor opentelemetry-api so the exclusions are completely superfluous. Perhaps they were dependencies in the past. The change is in a separate commit.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
OK, thanks for the clarification, it makes perfect sense.
Needed to avoid convergence conflicts in Quarkus CXF - see