feat: Add message parameter to otel_debug macro

[andborja]

Change Summary

Adding "message" attribute to the otel_debug macro.

Part of #1972

What issue does this PR close?

• Closes NA

How are these changes tested?

Building the package

Are there any user-facing changes?

No

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 86.48649% with 5 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 85.71%. Comparing base (e95eee9) to head (fbe852c).
⚠️ Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #1973      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   85.72%   85.71%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files         513      513              
  Lines      162056   162070      +14     
==========================================
+ Hits       138919   138926       +7     
- Misses      22603    22610       +7     
  Partials      534      534              

Components	Coverage Δ
otap-dataflow	87.52% <86.48%> (-0.01%)	⬇️
query_abstraction	80.61% <ø> (ø)
query_engine	90.23% <ø> (ø)
syslog_cef_receivers	∅ <ø> (∅)
otel-arrow-go	53.50% <ø> (ø)
quiver	91.61% <ø> (ø)

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

[jmacd]

Part of #1972

[jmacd]

#1972

@andborja what do you think of un-quoting the first argument, so RECEIVER_CREATE_START instead of "receiver.create.start" for example?

[cijothomas]

I am not opposed to the idea of using Human readable message in logs. Requesting changes to address the following.

1. Make it optional. Only few scenarios benefit from human readable message, so no need of making it mandatory.
2. Make it for all severity, not just debug.
3. Don't add message for the sake of adding it. If the event.name says "component.started", what additional value does a message "Component is started" providing?

open-telemetry/semantic-conventions#3343 We are totally aligned with this proposal in OTel conventions as well with the above. (this PR in semantic convention is, in turn, aligned with OTel specification too)

[andborja]

I am not opposed to the idea of using Human readable message in logs. Requesting changes to address the following.

1. Make it optional. Only few scenarios benefit from human readable message, so no need of making it mandatory.
2. Make it for all severity, not just debug.
3. Don't add message for the sake of adding it. If the event.name says "component.started", what additional value does a message "Component is started" providing?

open-telemetry/semantic-conventions#3343 We are totally aligned with this proposal in OTel conventions as well with the above. (this PR in semantic convention is, in turn, aligned with OTel specification too)

1. Agree.
2. This PR is for debug only. I'll send others for the rest.
3. Agree.

Cijo, Andres, and I discussed.
We're going after requirements, not much agreement on style/syntax.

[cijothomas]

#1973 (comment) is unresolved, and my suggestion is to keep message at the very last, matching existing pattern in tracing and log. Or special case "message" attribute name like done by OTel Rust (https://github.com/open-telemetry/opentelemetry-rust/pull/2689/changes) with blessing from tracing maintainers.

[jmacd]

I think we can try to improve the macros later, or change this stuff again -- what's important is we have both event name and optional message. (No more complaints from me!)

[cijothomas]

I think we can try to improve the macros later, or change this stuff again -- what's important is we have both event name and optional message. (No more complaints from me!)

As suggested here, we already had the ability to send optional message with special casing "message" attribute.
#1973 (comment)