Skip to content

chore: rename from log to event, clarify value requirements - #341

Merged
beeme1mr merged 3 commits into
mainfrom
include-value-in-observablity
Sep 25, 2025
Merged

beeme1mr merged 3 commits into
mainfrom
include-value-in-observablity

Conversation

@beeme1mr

@beeme1mr beeme1mr commented Sep 15, 2025 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

This PR

  • updates references from log to events
  • expand explanation on when a value is required

Notes

Events are the preferred nomenclature in OTel. @dyladan will update the corresponding OTel semcon accordingly.

open-telemetry/semantic-conventions#2781

Follow-up Tasks

I'll create tickets to update related telemetry functions in SDKs.

…s in observability appendix

Signed-off-by: Michael Beemer <beeme1mr@users.noreply.github.com>
@beeme1mr
beeme1mr requested a review from a team as a code owner September 15, 2025 20:34

@gemini-code-assist gemini-code-assist Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Summary of Changes

Hello @beeme1mr, I'm Gemini Code Assist1! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!

This pull request refines the OpenFeature observability documentation by standardizing terminology and clarifying data requirements. It ensures consistency with OpenTelemetry's semantic conventions by renaming 'log records' to 'event records' and provides more precise guidance on when to include the 'value' field in telemetry signals.

Highlights

  • Nomenclature Update: Updated all references from 'log records' to 'event records' to align with OpenTelemetry's preferred terminology for feature flag telemetry.
  • Value Requirement Clarification: Expanded the explanation regarding when the 'value' field is required in feature flag event records, emphasizing its conditional recommendation/requirement based on variant availability.
Using Gemini Code Assist

The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.

Invoking Gemini

You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands on the current page.

Feature Command Description
Code Review /gemini review Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state.
Pull Request Summary /gemini summary Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state.
Comment @gemini-code-assist Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in pull request comments and review comments.
Help /gemini help Displays a list of available commands.

Customization

To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.

Limitations & Feedback

Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here.

You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.

Footnotes

  1. Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution. ↩

@gemini-code-assist gemini-code-assist Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Code Review

This pull request updates the observability documentation to align with upcoming OpenTelemetry nomenclature, replacing 'log' with 'event' for feature flag records. It also clarifies the requirement for including the value field in telemetry. The changes are consistent and improve the clarity of the specification. I have one minor suggestion to improve the readability of the updated footnote.

Comment thread specification/appendix-d-observability.md Outdated
Co-authored-by: gemini-code-assist[bot] <176961590+gemini-code-assist[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
Signed-off-by: Michael Beemer <beeme1mr@users.noreply.github.com>

@askpt askpt left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Just a minor question.

Comment thread specification/appendix-d-observability.md
@beeme1mr

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

I'll mention this PR in tomorrow's meeting with the goal of merging it by the end of the week.

@beeme1mr
beeme1mr merged commit 25dac91 into main Sep 25, 2025
7 checks passed
@beeme1mr
beeme1mr deleted the include-value-in-observablity branch September 25, 2025 16:51
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.

6 participants