feat: add spec compliant otel hook

[thiyagu06]

This PR

added otel spec compliant hook.

Related Issues

Fixes #144

Notes

Follow-up Tasks

How to test

add the hook and see the result in Jaeger tracing UI.

openFeatureAPI.addHooks(new OpenTelemetryHook());

[beeme1mr]

Thanks @thiyagu06! We'll review this tomorrow but it looks great at first glance.

I noticed in the screenshot you attached that the variant is quoted. Is that expected?

[thiyagu06]

Thanks @thiyagu06! We'll review this tomorrow but it looks great at first glance.

I noticed in the screenshot you attached that the variant is quoted. Is that expected?

yeah. Thanks for pointing that. the variant is double quoted because, I convert the value into json format.

java-sdk-contrib/hooks/open-telemetry/src/main/java/dev/openfeature/contrib/hooks/otel/OpenTelemetryHook.java

Line 77 in 4a544ef

return objectMapper.writeValueAsString(value);

The reason behind that is I'm not sure what kind of values use will be adding for the Object type. Is that okay if we could use toString method instead of using jackson serialise it.

[toddbaert]

Thanks @thiyagu06! We'll review this tomorrow but it looks great at first glance.
I noticed in the screenshot you attached that the variant is quoted. Is that expected?

yeah. Thanks for pointing that. the variant is double quoted because, I convert the value into json format.

java-sdk-contrib/hooks/open-telemetry/src/main/java/dev/openfeature/contrib/hooks/otel/OpenTelemetryHook.java

Line 77 in 4a544ef

return objectMapper.writeValueAsString(value);

The reason behind that is I'm not sure what kind of values use will be adding for the Object type. Is that okay if we could use toString method instead of using jackson serialise it.

Yes, in fact, I think we should try to avoid dependencies such as jackson here. I think .toString() is fine.

Complex object values are represented by our dev.openfeature.sdk.Structure interfaces, which house attribute maps and can have their own toString implementation (though for the current implementations, the default works fine). I don't think we need to standardize on JSON here.

If in the future we decide to standardize the representation of these objects, we could implement one in the overridden toString.

[thiyagu06]

Thanks @thiyagu06! We'll review this tomorrow but it looks great at first glance.
I noticed in the screenshot you attached that the variant is quoted. Is that expected?

yeah. Thanks for pointing that. the variant is double quoted because, I convert the value into json format.

java-sdk-contrib/hooks/open-telemetry/src/main/java/dev/openfeature/contrib/hooks/otel/OpenTelemetryHook.java

Line 77 in 4a544ef

return objectMapper.writeValueAsString(value);

The reason behind that is I'm not sure what kind of values use will be adding for the Object type. Is that okay if we could use toString method instead of using jackson serialise it.

Yes, in fact, I think we should try to avoid dependencies such as jackson here. I think .toString() is fine.

Complex object values are represented by our dev.openfeature.sdk.Structure interfaces, which house attribute maps and can have their own toString implementation (though for the current implementations, the default works fine). I don't think we need to standardize on JSON here.

If in the future we decide to standardize the representation of these objects, we could implement one in the overridden toString.

Yeah. I understand that. Fixed it

[toddbaert]

My only real concern is: https://github.com/open-feature/java-sdk-contrib/pull/169/files#r1055525423

Once this is addressed it looks like it can be merged. Thanks a lot, especially for even giving this a test in Jaeger.

[toddbaert]

Looks good to me, thank you!