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

[receiver/gitlab] add tracing via webhook skeleton #36838

Draft
wants to merge 9 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

niwoerner
Copy link
Contributor

Description

This PR adds the structure and trace skeleton for a new and already accepted Gitlabreceiver. (thanks @atoulme for sponsoring this!)

The Gitlabreceiver aligns very closely with the Githubreceiver and this PR mostly mirrors the change from this PR: #36632

I'm working together with @adrielp on building out the Gitlabreceiver. More PRs to introduce metrics and actual tracing functionality are about to follow with subsequent PRs.

Link to tracking issue

#35207

Testing

Added basic tests and built the component to test that the health check endpoint, when tracing is enabled, operates correctly.

Documentation

Docs how to configure the Gitlabreceiver via webhooks have been added. While the Gitlabreceiver can be configured after this PR, it will not actually do anything since it is under development and just the skeleton PR.

Secret string `mapstructure:"secret"` // secret for webhook
}

type RequiredHeader struct {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I've been thinking about this for the GitHub receiver as well, but I think this should be converted to RequiredHeaders of map[string]string so that a user can set any set of headers that are required. The main one that would be useful for GitLab would be X-Gitlab-Instance. But if a user has a WAF sitting in front of the receiver (which they should anyway for public traffic) then they can set additional headers of their own choosing.

For the other headers listed in the doc, I think we should map these internal to the receiver.

@niwoerner niwoerner marked this pull request as draft December 18, 2024 19:04
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants