Skip to content

[Cloud Run] (chore) Rename in-process to in-container #31267

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom
Open
wants to merge 4 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

[Cloud Run] (chore) Rename in-process to in-container #31267

wants to merge 4 commits into from
+52 −37

Conversation

nhulston
Copy link
Contributor

@nhulston nhulston commented Aug 25, 2025 •
edited
Loading

What does this PR do? What is the motivation?

  • Rename in-process instrumentation to in-container instrumentation.
  • Technically, we install the sidecar as a separate process, so "in-process" doesn't make sense.
  • Our team had a discussion in Slack, and we decided that "in-container" is more accurate.
  • This PR also adds aliases so old links to our docs redirect to the new link.
  • I updated our sample apps which are hyperlinked in (chore): Move in-process to in-container serverless-gcp-sample-apps#8

Merge instructions

Merge readiness:

  • Ready for merge

Additional notes

@github-actions github-actions bot added the Architecture Everything related to the Doc backend label Aug 25, 2025
@github-actions GitHub Actions
Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Aug 25, 2025 •
edited
Loading

📝 Documentation Team Review Required

This pull request requires approval from the @DataDog/documentation team before it can be merged.

Please ensure your changes follow our documentation guidelines and wait for a team member to review and approve your changes.

@github-actions GitHub Actions
Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Aug 25, 2025 •
edited
Loading

Preview links (active after the build_preview check completes)

Renamed files

Modified Files

@nhulston nhulston mentioned this pull request Aug 25, 2025
Merged
3 tasks
@nhulston nhulston force-pushed the nicholas.hulston/rename-in-process-to-in-container branch from 0bbb9b0 to d759fbb Compare August 25, 2025 20:01
@nhulston nhulston marked this pull request as ready for review August 25, 2025 20:18
@nhulston nhulston requested review from a team as code owners August 25, 2025 20:18
@maycmlee
Copy link
Contributor

Created a docs review card: https://datadoghq.atlassian.net/browse/DOCS-11903

@maycmlee maycmlee added the editorial review Waiting on a more in-depth review label Aug 25, 2025
jcstorms1
jcstorms1 approved these changes Aug 25, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@jcstorms1 jcstorms1 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks good. I just wasn't sure about casing consistency. I assume the docs team has a preference and will let us know.

content/en/serverless/azure_functions/_index.md
@@ -101,7 +101,7 @@ This page explains how to collect traces, trace metrics, runtime metrics, and cu
Datadog.Serverless.CompatibilityLayer.Start();
```

If your Azure Function app uses the In-Process model, add a NuGet package reference to `Microsoft.Azure.Functions.Extensions`:
If your Azure Function app uses the In-Container model, add a NuGet package reference to `Microsoft.Azure.Functions.Extensions`:
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Should we try to keep casing persistent? I see it lower and upper-cased in different areas.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@jcstorms1 jcstorms1 jcstorms1 approved these changes

At least 1 approving review is required to merge this pull request.

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
Architecture Everything related to the Doc backend editorial review Waiting on a more in-depth review serverless
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
4 participants
@nhulston @maycmlee @jcstorms1 @cswatt