otelslog: set SeverityText on log records

[adomaskizogian]

Sets SeverityText using slog.Level available at the source.

Not having SeverityText is somewhat awkward when scouting through logs. I believe majority of software maintainers are used to having severity expressed as string.
Plus otelzap does it already.

Resolves:

• Filed 'SeverityText' is not mapped from field 'LogAttributes' opentelemetry-go#5902
• otelslog: Set SeverityText #6707

[linux-foundation-easycla]

The committers listed above are authorized under a signed CLA.

• ✅ login: adomaskizogian / name: Adomas Kizogian (44f1c51, 763c0ae, 9585b21, 2acc745, bd0284e, ff537f9, ea9092b)
• ✅ login: pellared / name: Robert Pająk (301de44)

[pellared]

Please add a changelog entry and cover the new functionality in unit tests?

[adomaskizogian]

Please add a changelog entry and cover the new functionality in unit tests?

Thanks for feedback. Will do

[MrAlias]

The linked issues are already closed as we do not plan to add this. It seems the only justification being given here is subjective and a guess at best. Is there other motivation not already provided?

[adomaskizogian]

The linked issues are already closed as we do not plan to add this. It seems the only justification being given here is subjective and a guess at best. Is there other motivation not already provided?

In none of those issues the intent to not support SeverityText on slog bridge in the future was expressed.

In both of those issues though, the need for it was stated.
Under one of the comments it was mentiomed that zap bridge already supports it and I followed a similar approach, used it as an example.

One of the motivators is poor ux when querying for logs and filtering by severity. Now not having the easy and quick to grasp SeverityText will force everyone to do the seveirty matching using numeric representation which for someone outside of otel domain can be not so intuitive compared to a text representation of it. E.g. Local dev environment with console exporter configured. Chanves are users will have to add log record transformation pipelines to introduce it.
Why not solve it like was done on otel zap?

I strongly believe different bridges should be on par feature wise and otel bridge should not influence the choice of logging library

[dmathieu]

If we do this, it will need to be tested.

[pellared]

The linked issues are already closed as we do not plan to add this. It seems the only justification being given here is subjective and a guess at best. Is there other motivation not already provided?

I reopened the issue. See: #6707 (comment).

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 81.0%. Comparing base (e2db05c) to head (301de44).
Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@          Coverage Diff          @@
##            main   #7198   +/-   ##
=====================================
  Coverage   81.0%   81.0%           
=====================================
  Files        204     204           
  Lines      18079   18080    +1     
=====================================
+ Hits       14650   14651    +1     
  Misses      3003    3003           
  Partials     426     426           

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
bridges/otelslog/handler.go	93.3% <100.0%> (+<0.1%)	⬆️

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

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

[adomaskizogian]

Please add a changelog entry and cover the new functionality in unit tests?

changelog entry: bd0284e

unit tests: 2acc745

[pellared]

Planning to merge on Friday.
CC @MrAlias

[pellared]

@adomaskizogian, thank you very much for you contribution 🥇