Align internal no-op implementations into Noop namespaces. #1262
Conversation
…th \OpenTelemetry\API\Metrics\Noop.
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #1262 +/- ##
=========================================
Coverage 83.87% 83.87%
Complexity 2136 2136
=========================================
Files 296 296
Lines 6104 6104
=========================================
Hits 5120 5120
Misses 984 984
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
Continue to review full report in Codecov by Sentry.
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't think this should be moved into Noop, since it's not directly related to noop traces (it is used by Span too)
Many aren't marked as internal (and somebody doing manual configuration might have cause to, for example, create a noop tracer provider). So, I think it's a BC break and we might need to plan for it (or, at least document it in the release notes) |
Given that is the case, it is probably best to close this one off for now. 👍 |
I noticed the noop namespace for metrics (
\OpenTelemetry\API\Metrics\Noop) and had seen the other signals did not follow the same pattern.Some IDE magic moved these around quickly so I thought I'd open a PR.
These are marked as internal, so by my understanding we could theoretically move them without breaking our public API. Whether we should is a different question, so I leave that to feedback.