Rename ParentOrElse to ParentBased and generalize to support all cases

[dengliming]

closes #1572

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #1577 into master will increase coverage by 0.03%.
The diff coverage is 100.00%.

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##             master    #1577      +/-   ##
============================================
+ Coverage     86.85%   86.88%   +0.03%     
- Complexity     1392     1393       +1     
============================================
  Files           162      162              
  Lines          5369     5397      +28     
  Branches        513      519       +6     
============================================
+ Hits           4663     4689      +26     
- Misses          523      524       +1     
- Partials        183      184       +1     

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ	Complexity Δ
...main/java/io/opentelemetry/sdk/trace/Samplers.java	93.61% <100.00%> (+2.70%)	14.00 <2.00> (+1.00)
...io/opentelemetry/sdk/trace/config/TraceConfig.java	95.00% <100.00%> (ø)	6.00 <1.00> (ø)
...y/sdk/metrics/aggregator/DoubleMinMaxSumCount.java	96.07% <0.00%> (-3.93%)	6.00% <0.00%> (ø%)

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update ca85d8f...4d0ba9c. Read the comment docs.

[Oberon00]

Just renaming is insufficient. https://github.com/open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification/blob/master/specification/trace/sdk.md#parentbased

[jkwatson]

Just renaming is insufficient. https://github.com/open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification/blob/master/specification/trace/sdk.md#parentbased

yes, I don't think this will close #1572, but I think it's a step along the way. If we don't close #1572 with this PR, are you ok with it as a first step, @Oberon00 ?

[Oberon00]

Yeah, sorry I just meant "insufficient to close #1572". 😃 EDIT: So I think the "closes #1572" must be removed from the PR description before merging this.

[jkwatson]

@dengliming can you either 1) remove the closes from the PR description or 2) address making sure the implementation fully addresses the spec?

Thanks!

[dengliming]

@jkwatson Sorry. just forgot it. : ) . I will do the implementation fully addresses the spec recently. Can you assign to me?

[jkwatson]

@jkwatson Sorry. just forgot it. : ) . I will do the implementation fully addresses the spec recently. Can you assign to me?

Done, and thanks for taking that on!

[jkwatson]

This is looking pretty good to me. Thanks for putting in the work!

[anuraaga]

Mostly looks good, thanks

[anuraaga]

Sorry noticed one more small comment on the javadoc

[anuraaga]

Thanks!