[Request for Maintenance] CPP tooling in open-telemetry/build-tools

[jsuereth]

There's a lot of dependabot failures to upgrade the cpp tooling in build-tools repository.

As such, I'd like to propose the following:

1. We can create a specific cpp-build-tools repository. This would publish a docker image just like the existing build-tools repo.
2. We grant maintainer access of this repository to ALL C++ maintainers (can include -contrib to if needed).
3. The C++ maintainers would then be responsible for keeping tools (like lint, docker-image) up-to-date.

Today - Given the distributed nature of ownership of the build-tools repository, it's hard and/or impractical for CPP maintainers to make fixes to build-tools, get reviews and update their projects.

I'm unfortunately unable to attend your SiG due to conflicting meetings, but am happy to discuss the process of passing maintenance of these tools to the C++ maintainers on this issue or (if necessary) in the specification meeting.

Related: open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#3899
Related: open-telemetry/semantic-conventions#767

[esigo]

I support the idea of new repository with the possibility to publish docker image.

[marcalff]

Hi @jsuereth

I support this idea also.

[lalitb]

I think it was earlier discussed and agreed to remove this tooling - #2050
cc @bogdandrutu

[ThomsonTan]

I support this idea of moving cpp-build-tools to a new repo.

[marcalff]

I think it was earlier discussed and agreed to remove this tooling - #2050 cc @bogdandrutu

It is correct the opentelemetry-cpp CI does not use the docker image provided, which is why the decision then was to remove it.

Since then, I had to reinstall a new computer from 0, and discovered how actually useful the docker image is to format all the code, especially for cmake-format, when all the tooling is not available in the distribution used.

For new contributors submitting a PR for the first time, clang-format and cmake-format are a strong barrier.

Keeping the docker image available, assuming we advertise it more, will help.

In short, I am reverting my previous opinion, and now prefer to keep the tooling.

[lalitb]

Got it, thanks. makes sense to have a separate repo that publishes a docker image of this tooling.

[jsuereth]

@marcalff Should I assume you'd be the primary owner then helping me move this tooling into its own repository?

I can set up the repository with all existing CPP maintainers/approvers and help get the docker-image publishing working, then let you take over from there, if this all makes sense.

Accepting this issue (triage/accepted) label will tell me to go forward and I'll start creating the repository.

[marcalff]

@jsuereth

Yes, agreed.

[jsuereth]

@marcalff I'm still working on getting your dockerhub publishing credentials set up, but please try out the repository here: https://github.com/open-telemetry/cpp-build-tools