+1 (binding) Nice!

On Wed, Jun 15, 2022 at 8:08 AM Elad Kalif <[email protected]> wrote:

> + 1 (binding)
>
> On Wed, Jun 15, 2022 at 2:05 PM Phani Kumar
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> +1 (non-binding), let's do it !
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 15, 2022 at 4:29 PM Igor Kholopov
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> +1 (non-binding), let's make it happen!
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jun 14, 2022 at 11:12 PM Tomasz Urbaszek <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> +1 (binding), OpenTelemetry is great!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, 14 Jun 2022 at 22:14, Jarek Potiuk <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Big +1  (binding) from me. I took part in preparing it and I see more
>>>>> and more need from users who want it.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Jun 14, 2022 at 6:26 PM Howard Yoo <[email protected]>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Now that Summit is over (well done all the speakers! The talks I've
>>>>>> caught so far have been great) I'm ready to push forward with 
>>>>>> OpenTelemetry
>>>>>> Support for Airflow, and I would like to call for a vote on
>>>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/AIRFLOW/AIP-49+OpenTelemetry+Support+for+Apache+Airflow
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The vote will last for 7 business days, until 2022/06/22 at 20:00 UTC.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> To briefly introduce you to this AIP, the proposal describes
>>>>>> implementing how Airflow can be instrumented to emit metrics, traces, and
>>>>>> logs in a common open specification called OpenTelemetry (
>>>>>> opentelemetry.io). The proposal was based on the several POC's that
>>>>>> were conducted to test the feasibility of the specification.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Personally I believe this would greatly help Airflow to become better
>>>>>> 'observed' by many different monitoring tools out there, with better ways
>>>>>> to expose and also customize telemetry data for many critical use cases.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If anyone has any changes you think are fundamental/foundational to
>>>>>> the core idea you have 1 business week to raise it :).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thank you for all your help in making this proposal possible,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Howard
>>>>>>
>>>>>

Reply via email to