-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 164
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
Support Elastic Common Schema (ECS) in OpenTelemetry #222
Conversation
… benefits of this OTEP
Co-authored-by: Armin Ruech <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Armin Ruech <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Reiley Yang <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Georg Pirklbauer <[email protected]>
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.
I'm supportive of continuing this work.
The reason I ask is because the security domain fields are specifically mentioned several times and some of them don't have obvious OTel applications.
I agree this has been a long time coming and it's good to see some alignment. Want to be clear that I'm not trying to be a thorn here, just want to make sure everyone is on the same page. I don't want to end up in the situation in the future where elastic folks feel like we reneged on the agreement if some of the fields without obvious applications take a long time to be integrated, but also don't want to end up in a situation where OTel is taking on the maintenance burden for fields which we're not really using. |
@tigrannajaryan I'll merge the OTEP now given we got a good set of approvals and your concerns have been addressed (I believe). Let's follow up offline once you are back from vacation and see if you have additional comments what we should follow up in another PR. |
Reopening the OTEP (as the new owner of the OTEP) on supporting the Elastic Common Schema in OpenTelemetry (as a continuation of #199).
Would love to see the discussion from #199 to continue on this PR and approvals that have been already made on #199 being 'transitioned' / given here again.