Fix vanity import

[mx-psi]

Follow up to #2197.

porto doesn't complain about this for some reason.

I don't think this warrants a Changelog entry, but I can't add the Skip Changelog label

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #2277 (ac86a48) into main (7461a8d) will increase coverage by 72.5%.
The diff coverage is n/a.

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           main   #2277      +/-   ##
=======================================
+ Coverage      0   72.5%   +72.5%     
=======================================
  Files         0     168     +168     
  Lines         0   11874   +11874     
=======================================
+ Hits          0    8611    +8611     
- Misses        0    3029    +3029     
- Partials      0     234     +234     

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
internal/metric/registry/registry.go	86.8% <ø> (ø)
exporters/stdout/stdouttrace/config.go	100.0% <0.0%> (ø)
baggage/baggage.go	98.2% <0.0%> (ø)
exporters/otlp/otlptrace/exporter.go	0.0% <0.0%> (ø)
...ers/otlp/otlpmetric/internal/otlpconfig/options.go	65.8% <0.0%> (ø)
bridge/opencensus/exporter.go	100.0% <0.0%> (ø)
sdk/metric/controller/controllertest/test.go	100.0% <0.0%> (ø)
exporters/stdout/stdoutmetric/config.go	85.7% <0.0%> (ø)
propagation/baggage.go	100.0% <0.0%> (ø)
sdk/trace/id_generator.go	100.0% <0.0%> (ø)
... and 159 more

[Aneurysm9]

Trivial change to an import comment, merging with a single approval.

[jcchavezs]

Interesting one @mx-psi. I think the reason why porto does not complain about this is because this is an internal package and porto ignore internal packages https://github.com/jcchavezs/porto/blob/aab52daf3ac470aa9fd85614d560dc157e0e8234/files.go#L26. I think internal packages should not have vanity imports because they aren't exported but I do agree in large code bases it is better to have it so maybe open an issue in porto to support internal packages through a flag?

[mx-psi]

I think the reason why porto does not complain about this is because this is an internal package and porto ignore internal packages

That makes sense, thanks for the explanation :)

I think internal packages should not have vanity imports because they aren't exported but I do agree in large code bases it is better to have it

I don't have a strong stance on whether they should/should not have the vanity imports; the problem is that if they have one and it's wrong it will break some builds (e.g. gobind and gomobile will complain). I opened jcchavezs/porto#11 to add a flag to check internal packages and we can add them everywhere if maintainers think it makes sense in this codebase (see #2279 for discussion).