From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.1 (2015-04-28) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.9 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.1 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60FAD1F403 for ; Mon, 11 Jun 2018 05:56:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753911AbeFKF4m (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 Jun 2018 01:56:42 -0400 Received: from cloud.peff.net ([104.130.231.41]:41024 "HELO cloud.peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1753866AbeFKF4l (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 Jun 2018 01:56:41 -0400 Received: (qmail 5389 invoked by uid 109); 11 Jun 2018 05:56:42 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO peff.net) (10.0.1.2) by cloud.peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with SMTP; Mon, 11 Jun 2018 05:56:42 +0000 Authentication-Results: cloud.peff.net; auth=none Received: (qmail 13542 invoked by uid 111); 11 Jun 2018 05:56:56 -0000 Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with (ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 encrypted) SMTP; Mon, 11 Jun 2018 01:56:56 -0400 Authentication-Results: peff.net; auth=none Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Mon, 11 Jun 2018 01:56:39 -0400 Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2018 01:56:39 -0400 From: Jeff King To: Johannes Schindelin Cc: =?utf-8?B?w4Z2YXIgQXJuZmrDtnLDsA==?= Bjarmason , Duy Nguyen , Johannes Sixt , Thomas Braun , Jeff Hostetler , Git Mailing List , Junio C Hamano , Jeff Hostetler Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v1] telemetry design overview (part 1) Message-ID: <20180611055639.GA28598@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <20180607145313.25015-1-git@jeffhostetler.com> <20180608090758.GA15112@sigill.intra.peff.net> <688240ef-34a1-ee9a-215a-b4f9628e7c72@virtuell-zuhause.de> <9ab3eec1-40c1-8543-e122-ed4ccfd367b4@kdbg.org> <87fu1w53af.fsf@evledraar.gmail.com> <87bmck4gip.fsf@evledraar.gmail.com> <20180609065635.GE30224@sigill.intra.peff.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Sat, Jun 09, 2018 at 10:05:49PM +0200, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > > E.g., could we have a flag or environment variable to have the existing > > traces output JSON? I guess right now they're inherently free-form via > > trace_printf, so it would involve adding some structured interface > > calls. Which is more or less what I guess JeffH's proposed feature to > > look like. > > I think that is a much larger project than what JeffHost proposed, and > would unfortunately put too much of a brake on his project. I definitely don't want to stall somebody else's momentum with a bunch of what-if's. But I also don't want to end up down the road with two nearly-identical systems for tracing information. That's confusing to users, and to developers who must choose which system to use for any new tracing information they add. So I think it's worth at least giving a little thought to how we might leverage similarities between the trace system and this. Even if we don't implement it now, it would be nice to have a vague sense of how they could grow together in the long run. -Peff