feat(api-metrics): rename metric instruments to match feature-freeze API specification

[legendecas]

This PR applies following renames regarding to the feature-freeze metrics API spec:

• s/ValueRecorder/Histogram/
• s/ValueObserver/ObservableGauge/
• s/SumObserver/ObservableCounter/
• s/UpDownSumObserver/ObservableUpDownCounter/
• s/BoundBaseObserver/BoundObservableBase/

There is no functional change.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #2496 (2ad4109) into main (96dab9f) will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is n/a.

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #2496   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   93.05%   93.05%           
=======================================
  Files         139      139           
  Lines        5172     5172           
  Branches     1110     1110           
=======================================
  Hits         4813     4813           
  Misses        359      359           

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
...ackages/opentelemetry-api-metrics/src/NoopMeter.ts	82.35% <0.00%> (ø)
...ages/opentelemetry-api-metrics/src/types/Metric.ts	100.00% <0.00%> (ø)
...emetry-sdk-metrics-base/src/ValueRecorderMetric.ts
...lemetry-sdk-metrics-base/src/BaseObserverMetric.ts
...elemetry-sdk-metrics-base/src/SumObserverMetric.ts
...ry-sdk-metrics-base/src/UpDownSumObserverMetric.ts
...emetry-sdk-metrics-base/src/ValueObserverMetric.ts
...entelemetry-sdk-metrics-base/src/ObserverResult.ts
...ntelemetry-sdk-metrics-base/src/HistogramMetric.ts	100.00% <0.00%> (ø)
...-metrics-base/src/ObservableUpDownCounterMetric.ts	100.00% <0.00%> (ø)
... and 4 more

[vmarchaud]

lgtm

[pirgeo]

The specification "highly recommends" ObservableCounter, ObservableGauge, and ObservableUpDownCounter. Is there a reason or strong opinion for the deviation here (CounterObserver, GaugeObserver, UpDownCounterObserver)?

[dyladan]

The specification "highly recommends" ObservableCounter, ObservableGauge, and ObservableUpDownCounter. Is there a reason or strong opinion for the deviation here (CounterObserver, GaugeObserver, UpDownCounterObserver)?

I can only guess what @legendecas logic is here, but my guess is that it is to have the least disruption to what people already know. JS already had {}Observer naming so I think he just kept it.

I would prefer to go with the spec on this one though. We will be changing a lot of the metric spec anyway so there isn't a strong reason to keep what we have.

[dyladan]

@legendecas are you planning no making the suggested naming changes?

[legendecas]

@dyladan If people are ok with the Observable* naming, I'm going to update the PR late today.

[pirgeo]

Great Work! I just added a few nits, but all of these are personal preference, so please disregard as you see fit.

[legendecas]

@pirgeo thanks for the review, updated!

[vmarchaud]

lgtm, i think we should wait for #2485 before merging this one though

[obecny]

Some minor things and few missing, but I also found some replacement which should be different, not sure if that is a mistake then or you rearranged the order but then maybe it will be easier to revert just the order so the replacing will be covered with those for easier review

Synchronous
Counter -> Counter
UpDownCounter -> UpDownCounter
ValueRecorder -> Histogram

Asynchronous
SumObserver -> ObservableCounter
UpDownSumObserver -> ObservableUpDownCounter
ValueObserver -> ObservableGauge

Please update also Upgrade guidelines listing what has changed and what not

[legendecas]

@obecny Reverted the reordering. Sorry for the inconvenience. Updated the PR with minor observable renaming.

[obecny]

looks great, thx for changes