Update integrations

[svrnm]

This is going to address some of #3221 requirements, cc @cartersocha

[cartersocha]

Awesome start

[cartersocha]

We should add integrations as a link on the homepage too - https://opentelemetry.io/

[cartersocha]

Not directly related to this PR but we may need to rethink the registry, adopters, and integrations pages a bit. Loose overlap that maybe could be combined?

[svrnm]

Not directly related to this PR but we may need to rethink the registry, adopters, and integrations pages a bit. Loose overlap that maybe could be combined?

Yes, we need to rethink a lot of that. for example if you look into the vendors there are 90% backends, but there are also at least two vendors of pipelines and probably some other non-backends, which may count as integrations or "something else"

[svrnm]

We should add integrations as a link on the homepage too - opentelemetry.io

not with this PR.

[mhausenblas]

LGTM, some suggestions inline

[theletterf]

Made some suggestions to streamline a little bit and reduce marketing overtones. (Although perhaps that's intended?)

[svrnm]

thank you @mhausenblas & @theletterf, I have applied most of your suggestions :-)

[arminru]

Thank you!

[svrnm]

5b46734 includes a few additional words for the documentation index:

https://deploy-preview-3278--opentelemetry.netlify.app/docs/

[cartersocha]

Not directly related to this PR but we may need to rethink the registry, adopters, and integrations pages a bit. Loose overlap that maybe could be combined?

Yes, we need to rethink a lot of that. for example if you look into the vendors there are 90% backends, but there are also at least two vendors of pipelines and probably some other non-backends, which may count as integrations or "something else"

Would this be a topic for the communications sig or another one? Happy to join and brainstorm or talk through potential re-orgs

[svrnm]

Not directly related to this PR but we may need to rethink the registry, adopters, and integrations pages a bit. Loose overlap that maybe could be combined?

Yes, we need to rethink a lot of that. for example if you look into the vendors there are 90% backends, but there are also at least two vendors of pipelines and probably some other non-backends, which may count as integrations or "something else"

Would this be a topic for the communications sig or another one? Happy to join and brainstorm or talk through potential re-orgs

Sig Comms, yes. We have had our share of discussions on this topic already, if you review some old issues (like #2178) you will get some more context. This PR is probably not the best place to discuss this. Feel free to raise a new meta issue, we can link to existing issues from there and have a consolidated discussion. I may have the one or the other opinion as well ;-)

[cartersocha]

Small follow up PR - #3306