Skip to content

Conversation

@trask
Copy link
Member

@trask trask commented Dec 6, 2024

## Release cadence

This repository roughly targets monthly minor releases from the `main` branch on the Friday after
This repository roughly targets monthly minor releases from the `main` branch on the Tuesday after
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I'm thinking to change the Instrumentation release date to the Thursday after this

"org.junit:junit-bom:5.11.3",
"io.grpc:grpc-bom:1.68.2",
"io.opentelemetry.instrumentation:opentelemetry-instrumentation-bom-alpha:${otelInstrumentationVersion}",
"io.opentelemetry:opentelemetry-bom-alpha:1.44.1-alpha",
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I didn't update to 1.45.0 in order to ensure everything works smoothly when renovate updates it after this PR is merged

@trask trask marked this pull request as ready for review December 7, 2024 16:35
@trask trask requested a review from a team December 7, 2024 16:35
@trask trask added this to the v1.42.0 milestone Dec 7, 2024
@trask trask merged commit 2b46b8c into open-telemetry:main Dec 8, 2024
14 checks passed
@trask trask deleted the dependencies branch December 8, 2024 15:15
runtimeOnly("io.opentelemetry:opentelemetry-exporter-logging")

implementation("io.opentelemetry.instrumentation:opentelemetry-jmx-metrics")
implementation("io.opentelemetry.instrumentation:opentelemetry-jmx-metrics:2.10.0-alpha")
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Moving contrib before instrumentation in the release allows to remove this circular dependency if we move the JMX insights code directly into contrib and then reuse it as-is in instrumentation. Do you think this would be something relevant to do ? It also changes a bit the "ownership" of the JMX-related code in the instrumentation by relying on the component owners of contrib instead.

Copy link
Member Author

@trask trask Dec 9, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think I'd prefer to go in the other direction and keep / move things that we release as part of the core java agent distribution into the java instrumentation repo (@laurit wdyt? EDIT: we could introduce "component owners" in that repo similar to this repo)

@jackshirazi would this address your concern about release ordering, and we could go back to releasing instrumentation repo first and then contrib repo?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

If I understand that means:

  • moving contrib components that are included in instrumentation to instrumentation (with same component owners), for example: cloud resource attribute providers, aws x-ray propagator and baggage processor
  • removing any dependency from instrumentation to contrib
  • contrib can still depend on instrumentation and/or SDK, for example like the jmx-scraper reusing the instrumentation/jmx-metrics component.

One interesting aspect of adding component owners directly in instrumentation is that it helps to delegate changes that are related to those components to their respective owners.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@jackshirazi would this address your concern about release ordering, and we could go back to releasing instrumentation repo first and then contrib repo?

The concern is that if any contrib project needs a fix, it's an extra month before the agent gets that fix (if we release agent before contrib). It's not a dramatically bad concern, and it hasn't been an actual issue so far.

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.

9 participants