feat: use OTLP gRPC exporter by default

[rauno56]

❗ Integration tests cannot work on this PR - those are using the latest published version of the package, which does not understand gRPC configuration which we are using for both e2e test variants. ❗

Description

Replacing OTLP/HTTP exporters with OTLP/gRPC(for the main default) and Jaeger(for collectorless) tandem.

• POR-9648
• POR-9649

Type of change

• Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected)
• Documentation change or requires a documentation update
• Added automated tests
• Unit tests have been added/updated
• Documentation has been updated
• Change file has been generated (npm run change:new)
• Delete this branch (after the PR is merged)

[rauno56]

@theletterf, could you please proofread the changed docs?

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

Merging #319 (1b1d6cb) into main (0347c10) will increase coverage by 0.07%.
The diff coverage is 100.00%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #319      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   93.82%   93.89%   +0.07%     
==========================================
  Files          10       10              
  Lines         340      344       +4     
  Branches       88       89       +1     
==========================================
+ Hits          319      323       +4     
  Misses         21       21              

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
src/options.ts	98.93% <100.00%> (+0.04%)	⬆️

---

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 0347c10...1b1d6cb. Read the comment docs.

[rauno56]

Nice! Thanks for all the copy suggestions, @theletterf!

[seemk]

Can we be sure future versions of exporter-collector-grpc will have a compatible version of @grpc/grpc-js? Is the dependency explicitly needed if the exporter depends on one?

[rauno56]

The version of this should be updated with the exporter - this range is what was specified on the exporter.

The dep isn't explicitly needed, added it when lint pointed that out. Although, the only real reason to actually do that in our case is to avoid a situation where the exporter removes the dep which breaks us. Even if we do add the dep, it causes undefined behaviour because the exporter will not be compatible anymore.

Removing the dep and adding the lint exception makes more sense to me now - WDYT?

[rauno56]

See bfb7d93.