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

Hosting: README documentation + tweaks #2080

Merged
merged 8 commits into from
Jun 22, 2021

Conversation

CodeBlanch
Copy link
Member

@CodeBlanch CodeBlanch commented Jun 11, 2021

Added documentation to the hosting README with usage examples. Tweaked some of the XML comments for clarity. Allowed configuration callbacks to be registered inside themselves. Fixed some bugs. And, best of all, simplified things.

@CodeBlanch CodeBlanch requested a review from a team June 11, 2021 23:58
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jun 12, 2021

Codecov Report

Merging #2080 (d83dec6) into main (01dd4ab) will increase coverage by 2.87%.
The diff coverage is 85.58%.

❗ Current head d83dec6 differs from pull request most recent head b444df5. Consider uploading reports for the commit b444df5 to get more accurate results
Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #2080      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   82.12%   84.99%   +2.87%     
==========================================
  Files         250      187      -63     
  Lines        6774     6071     -703     
==========================================
- Hits         5563     5160     -403     
+ Misses       1211      911     -300     
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
src/OpenTelemetry.Api/Baggage.cs 100.00% <ø> (ø)
src/OpenTelemetry.Api/Internal/SpanHelper.cs 100.00% <ø> (ø)
src/OpenTelemetry.Api/Trace/ActivityExtensions.cs 94.11% <ø> (ø)
src/OpenTelemetry.Api/Trace/SpanAttributes.cs 100.00% <ø> (ø)
src/OpenTelemetry.Api/Trace/Status.cs 100.00% <ø> (ø)
...orter.InMemory/InMemoryExporterHelperExtensions.cs 60.00% <ø> (ø)
...nTelemetry.Exporter.Jaeger/Implementation/Batch.cs 84.09% <ø> (+3.65%) ⬆️
....Jaeger/Implementation/JaegerActivityExtensions.cs 94.96% <ø> (ø)
....Exporter.Jaeger/JaegerExporterHelperExtensions.cs 11.11% <0.00%> (-4.28%) ⬇️
...Telemetry.Exporter.Jaeger/JaegerExporterOptions.cs 100.00% <ø> (ø)
... and 101 more

.AddAspNetCoreInstrumentation()
.AddHttpClientInstrumentation()
.AddZipkinExporter()
.AddMyFeature());
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Does this mean ZipkinExporter will run before MyProcessor?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Does this mean ZipkinExporter will run before MyProcessor?

Yes.

I didn't think of this until right now, but this is a kind of interesting situation...

.AddMyFeature()
.AddProcessor(new CustomProcessor())

In that case CustomProcessor will run before MyFeature's MyProcessor because MyFeature is using Configure which defers execution (AddProcessor call) until Build is called.

May or may not be an issue?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

PS: I switched the order in the README to make it more real-world.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Not an issue in my opinion, but some folks might get shocked if they were expecting different behavior.

Basically we need to set the expectation that these are like TSRs and users should understand that ordering does matter.

Copy link
Member

@reyang reyang left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM.

@cijothomas cijothomas merged commit 9589345 into open-telemetry:main Jun 22, 2021
@CodeBlanch CodeBlanch deleted the hosting-docs branch June 22, 2021 18:47
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.

3 participants