gsoc: Integrate Kubeflow SDK with OpenTelemetry for GSoC 2026

[dhanishaphadate]

Description of Changes

Integrate Kubeflow SDK with OpenTelemetry as gsoc 2026 project proposal

Related Issues

kubeflow/sdk#164

Closes: #164

Related: #1164

Checklist

• You have signed off your commits
• Ensure you follow best practices from our contributing guide.
• (for big changes) I will post screenshots of the changes in a PR comment

[google-oss-prow]

Hi @dhanishaphadate. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a kubeflow member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with /ok-to-test on its own line. Until that is done, I will not automatically test new commits in this PR, but the usual testing commands by org members will still work. Regular contributors should join the org to skip this step.

Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the ok-to-test label.

I understand the commands that are listed here.

Details

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository.

[github-actions]

🚫 This command cannot be processed. Only organization members or owners can use the commands.

[andreyvelich]

Thanks for proposing this @dhanishaphadate!
We talked about it during our latest Kubeflow SDK call.

@kramaranya and @astefanutti shared that some folks in Red Hat are working to integrate OpenTelemetry with Kubeflow SDK: https://youtu.be/zwPVfB8tTuY?t=1012

Can we update the scope of this project to ensure student will integrate other clients with OpenTelemetry.

[dhanishaphadate]

@kramaranya and @astefanutti Could you please let me know which parts of the SDK are already being worked on, so I can adjust the scope of this project accordingly?

kubeflow/
├── trainer/       # TrainerClient - distributed training & fine-tuning
├── optimizer/     # OptimizerClient - Katib AutoML & hyperparameter tuning  
├── hub/           # ModelRegistryClient - model artifact management
└── common/        # Shared utilities across clients

SDK Client	Component
TrainerClient	Kubeflow Trainer
OptimizerClient	Kubeflow Katib
ModelRegistryClient	Model Registry
PipelinesClient	Kubeflow Pipelines
SparkClient	Spark Operator

[Arhell]

/ok-to-test

[juliusvonkohout]

Please rebase after #4286. the deadline is close @andreyvelich

[dhanishaphadate]

@andreyvelich and @kramaranya Can you pleas review it as the deadline is approaching.

[kramaranya]

@kramaranya and @astefanutti Could you please let me know which parts of the SDK are already being worked on, so I can adjust the scope of this project accordingly?

kubeflow/
├── trainer/       # TrainerClient - distributed training & fine-tuning
├── optimizer/     # OptimizerClient - Katib AutoML & hyperparameter tuning  
├── hub/           # ModelRegistryClient - model artifact management
└── common/        # Shared utilities across clients

SDK Client Component
TrainerClient Kubeflow Trainer
OptimizerClient Kubeflow Katib
ModelRegistryClient Model Registry
PipelinesClient Kubeflow Pipelines
SparkClient Spark Operator

Hey @dhanishaphadate, we haven't done any integration work, I personally investigated how this integration might look like. I think we can proceed with this project proposal assuming you have a plan on how to integrate OTel with Kubeflow and mentor the student

[dhanishaphadate]

@kramaranya Thank you for your response. If you find everything good , can you please review and approve it.

[andreyvelich]

@dhanishaphadate Can you rebase your PR please?

[andreyvelich]

/lgtm
/approve
/hold
/assign @kramaranya

[andreyvelich]

@dhanishaphadate You need to rebase your PR once again.

[andreyvelich]

/lgtm

[dhanishaphadate]

@rareddy Could you please merge this ?

[kramaranya]

/lgtm

[juliusvonkohout]

/approve

[google-oss-prow]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: andreyvelich, juliusvonkohout

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Details

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• content/en/events/OWNERS [andreyvelich,juliusvonkohout]

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

[juliusvonkohout]

/unhold
For the deadline.
Do we weed a follow up PR to fix the numbering ?