|
| 1 | +# Developer Experience Project |
| 2 | + |
| 3 | +## Background and description |
| 4 | + |
| 5 | +Convenience as a SIG was initially proposed by [Ted |
| 6 | +Young](https://github.com/tedsuo) back in 2021. It was postponed to prioritize |
| 7 | +completion of signal specs and stabilization. A document was written at this |
| 8 | +time describing the intent to do user research and a brainstorming session, |
| 9 | +https://docs.google.com/document/d/1bjiw5L4E8FztRtfsy4Nu9A6qSP-BJlK6BBzl6Rea-Ds/edit#heading=h.b7qckyjgu28i. |
| 10 | +This brainstorm resulted in a list of some existing convenience functions |
| 11 | +languages have and proposed ones, like a `start` which takes the tracer from the |
| 12 | +active span in the current context, and proposals for defining annotations for |
| 13 | +easier instrumentation. |
| 14 | + |
| 15 | +### Current challenges |
| 16 | + |
| 17 | +We know users can find the API and SDK to be complex and daunting, the challenge |
| 18 | +is to collect actionable feedback on this issues. That information is spread |
| 19 | +across various languages' issues, blog posts and other online commentary. |
| 20 | +Performing an end user survey will help collect some of this knowledge into a |
| 21 | +central place that is actionable. |
| 22 | + |
| 23 | +When developer experience issues are encountered and addressed they are |
| 24 | +currently done in the various language implementations individually and this can |
| 25 | +lead to drift between different implementations and with the spec. An example |
| 26 | +would be how to handle marking a code block as `untraced` which has |
| 27 | +implementations in at least Java, Ruby and Javascript, each done differently, |
| 28 | +named differently and with no specification. This means users working across |
| 29 | +languages experience different results for similar features and other language |
| 30 | +SIG's aren't necessarily even aware of the pain point that their users may |
| 31 | +actually be experiencing. |
| 32 | + |
| 33 | +### Goals, objectives, and requirements |
| 34 | + |
| 35 | +With the 3 main signals going stable the time is right to circle back and |
| 36 | +address issues users may have faced over the years they've now been using |
| 37 | +OpenTelemetry. |
| 38 | + |
| 39 | +This project aims to identify developer experience issues with using |
| 40 | +OpenTelemetry, to select 3 that are concerns which can be addressed through |
| 41 | +updates to the specification and resolve them. |
| 42 | + |
| 43 | +## Deliverables |
| 44 | + |
| 45 | +The first deliverable will be the collection of experience in dealing with |
| 46 | +developer experience issues by each existing language SIG. This means not only |
| 47 | +additions to the API/SDK or libraries developed to enhance the experience for |
| 48 | +users but any that may be planned or are being thought about because of a |
| 49 | +frequent request from their users. A report of the findings will be shared with |
| 50 | +the whole community. |
| 51 | + |
| 52 | +Utilizing the knowledge gained from the first deliverable on potential areas of |
| 53 | +improvement the next deliverable will be an end user survey. Assuming the agreement and |
| 54 | +participation of the End User SIG this will be done in cooperation with them. A |
| 55 | +write-up of the results will follow, along with the group's decision on the top 3 |
| 56 | +issues for the group to work on. |
| 57 | + |
| 58 | +Prototypes of resolutions will be developed and, depending on the scope of the |
| 59 | +identified problem, OTEP's will be created where appropriate before opening PR's |
| 60 | +to the specification. |
| 61 | + |
| 62 | +## Staffing / Help Wanted |
| 63 | + |
| 64 | +- Project Lead: Tristan Sloughter (MyDecisiveAI) |
| 65 | + |
| 66 | +- GC sponsors: |
| 67 | + - @austinlparker (Honeycomb) |
| 68 | + - @tedso (Lightstep) |
| 69 | + |
| 70 | +- TC sponsors: |
| 71 | + - @tedso (Lightstep) |
| 72 | + - @lmolkova (Microsoft) |
| 73 | + |
| 74 | +- Maintainers, approvers and contributors: |
| 75 | + - @dmathieu (Elastic) |
| 76 | + - @julianocosta89 (Datadog) |
| 77 | + - @martinjt (Honeycomb) |
| 78 | + - @samsp-msft (Microsoft) |
| 79 | + - @stevejgordon (Elastic) |
| 80 | + |
| 81 | +## Meeting Times |
| 82 | + |
| 83 | +Weekly meetings TBA. |
| 84 | + |
| 85 | +## Timeline |
| 86 | + |
| 87 | +Work with End User SIG: Weeks but start time of this depends on their |
| 88 | +availability. |
| 89 | + |
| 90 | +Identifying priorities: Weeks |
| 91 | + |
| 92 | +Working on priorities: Weeks to months per. |
| 93 | + |
| 94 | +## Labels |
| 95 | + |
| 96 | +TBA |
| 97 | + |
| 98 | +## Linked Issues and PRs |
| 99 | + |
| 100 | +TBA |
| 101 | + |
| 102 | +## Project Board |
| 103 | + |
| 104 | +TBA |
0 commit comments