Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

traces/tracing feature are inconsistently defined and used #154

Open
z0w13 opened this issue Dec 31, 2024 · 3 comments
Open

traces/tracing feature are inconsistently defined and used #154

z0w13 opened this issue Dec 31, 2024 · 3 comments

Comments

@z0w13
Copy link

z0w13 commented Dec 31, 2024

There's both cfg(feature = "traces") and cfg(feature = "tracing") which are both the same feature as far as I can tell.

This works fine when enabling the traces feature as it creates the implicit tracing feature as its dependency

Ideally the feature would be defined as traces = ["dep:tracing"] and not an an implicit feature, unless I'm missing why you'd want both traces/tracing as features? Also, the feature check in the source files would consistently use traces.

I ran into this because I accidentally enabled tracing instead of traces and got some confusing compilation errors.

@gftea
Copy link
Owner

gftea commented Jan 3, 2025

we should replace all [cfg(feature = "tracing")] to [cfg(feature = "traces")] in codes.
We can not use dep:tracing because not supported if MSRV is 1.56 which was the goal of 1st release

@michaelklishin
Copy link
Contributor

Alternatively the library can do that, then bump the major and the MSRV version to switch to tracing.

@gftea
Copy link
Owner

gftea commented Jan 3, 2025

MSRV helps the lib to be widely compatible, we only need to bump MSRV when necessary.
I abondoned some nice syntax in new rust version in order to maintain as lowest MSRV as possible.
The v1.x, we will keep this, but if in the v2, we already bump msrv to higher due to rustls upgrade, then we can make it

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

No branches or pull requests

3 participants