removing jaeger exporters

[brettmc]

Jaeger has dropped support for the jaeger exporter in favour of opentelemetry exporter. The upstream repos are now archived. Support has been dropped from the opentelemetry collector, and other SIGs should follow soon.
ref: open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#2858 and open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#2859

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #890 (ad9b675) into main (7bfc121) will decrease coverage by 0.48%.
The diff coverage is n/a.

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##               main     #890      +/-   ##
============================================
- Coverage     81.59%   81.11%   -0.49%     
+ Complexity     2010     1905     -105     
============================================
  Files           264      252      -12     
  Lines          5226     4929     -297     
============================================
- Hits           4264     3998     -266     
+ Misses          962      931      -31     

Flag	Coverage Δ
7.4	80.56% <ø> (-0.52%)	⬇️
8.0	81.09% <ø> (-0.49%)	⬇️
8.1	81.24% <ø> (-0.48%)	⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

---

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 7bfc121...ad9b675. Read the comment docs.

[pdelewski]

Jaeger has dropped support for the jaeger exporter in favour of opentelemetry exporter. The upstream repos are now archived. Support has been dropped from the opentelemetry collector, and other SIGs should follow soon. ref: open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#2858 and open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#2859

@brettmc Is not that too early? It seems that there will be deprecation period regarding removing it from spec

[brettmc]

Is not that too early? It seems that there will be deprecation period regarding removing it from spec

I missed SIG yesterday, but Bob noted that he thought better to remove it before beta. It's definitely going away (upstream are not even accepting security fixes anymore), so removing it earlier means less for us to maintain.
A deprecation makes more sense for GA libraries where people may be using it in production and need some time to migrate, but I think doesn't apply to us?

[pdelewski]

Is not that too early? It seems that there will be deprecation period regarding removing it from spec

I missed SIG yesterday, but Bob noted that he thought better to remove it before beta. It's definitely going away (upstream are not even accepting security fixes anymore), so removing it earlier means less for us to maintain. A deprecation makes more sense for GA libraries where people may be using it in production and need some time to migrate, but I think doesn't apply to us?

Bob mentioned that yesterday, but after reading attached tickets, I was not sure we should do that now, however I agree that it should not apply to us