Hello once again. Sorry I misunderstood this with a maven-plugin. I have rolled a step back and added my class, OpenTracingBrokerPlugin, to the brocker-plugin. But however, I have not removed ZipKin, for now, as Michael had suggested because I am trying to make sure the plugin sends traces. However, am currently trying to modify the plugin to see if Autoconfiguration and passing the exporter as a variable might work. I am also writing test for the work done at the moment.
Here is the draft of the pull request I will be using https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/3895 Does this fit we go to the next level of tring to make this a separate package or should I first provide a sample of auto configuration and tests? On Tue, Jan 4, 2022 at 8:24 PM Clebert Suconic <clebert.suco...@gmail.com> wrote: > I don't understand why you wrote this as a Maven Plugin.. it should > just be a broker plugin. > > > I think you should move OpenTracingPlugin somewhere inside the > artemis-server for now... > > We should of course look to keep it as a separate module, but if you > make progress to at least connect in the right place, I can help you > later on refactoring this into broker-service. > > > For now, do this: > > > - Move OpenTracingPlugin inside the artemis-broker. but just implement > ActiveMQServerPlugin > - establish the connection on the tracing. > - Write an example using the OpenTracing, so we can establish some > progress. > > > After you are able to connect to a tracing server we can look into > moving it as a broker-service, so it becomes outside of the core (if > possible).. Perhaps we would need to make this as part of the broker.. > but lets just make some progress for now, and we can refactor this as > separated later. > > On Thu, Dec 30, 2021 at 2:52 PM Nabwegamo Brenda <brenser...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > I will start working on some tests if this makes sense, as i continue > with > > improving the logic. > > > > On Thu, Dec 30, 2021 at 10:50 PM Nabwegamo Brenda <brenser...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > Hello Micheal, Clebert, > > > i have avoided thinking too much and i have come up with > https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/commit/cae5f87b91b756e54b4f34b7511f242b4ad5723f > > > > > > > > > Honestly speaking, autoconfiguration makes things far simpler and > > > prettier. I guess this is what Clebert meant when he advised me to > keep > > > things simple, > > > > > > Any comments you leave for me will be much appreciated. > > > Thank you so much > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Dec 29, 2021 at 12:44 PM Nabwegamo Brenda < > brenser...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > >> Thanks Michael for your previous comments. > > >> > > >> Well I am a beginner with OpenTelemetry. I am going to do a little > > >> research on how autoconfiguration works. I will send a PR of how I > will > > >> have understood the previous comments. > > >> > > >> On Wed, Dec 29, 2021 at 1:50 AM michael.andre.pearce > > >> <michael.andre.pea...@me.com.invalid> wrote: > > >> > > >>> Left commentsTwo main feedback themes1) plugin should not be > > >>> touching/changing any core code the whole point is that a user simply > > >>> implements plugin independently to broker.2) Dependency, as > previously > > >>> mentioned it should not be having dependency to specific vendor > exporter > > >>> this is whole point of open telemetry that you plug/ code to open > telemetry > > >>> apis and then simply swap different exporters depending on tracing > vendor > > >>> selection of end user infra.Sent from my Galaxy > > >>> -------- Original message --------From: Nabwegamo Brenda < > > >>> brenser...@gmail.com> Date: 28/12/2021 14:06 (GMT+00:00) To: > > >>> dev@activemq.apache.org Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Open Telemetry with > > >>> ActiveMQ Hello once again!I have created the first sample on my > branch ( > > >>> > https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/commit/6042beac67a5ab48f6b8b930c528790695eb7e82 > ) > > >>> but i still have questions about its logic. I think I have tried > > >>> toimplement most of the suggestions and I kindly request for your > review. > > >>> IfIt looks somewhat good to you, i can go ahead and create a PR for > > >>> it.*Flaws in the PR*The way I implemented this, its like > OpenTelemetry > > >>> initialisation is calledmore than once, causing > GlobalOpenTelemetry.set has > > >>> already been called.<https://pastebin.com/aaK0nB2t>I kindly request > you > > >>> to take a look. Any form of suggestions or commentsare much > welcomed.Thank > > >>> you > > >> > > >> > > > > -- > Clebert Suconic >
