@jsternberg, thanks for your PR! By analyzing the annotation information on this pull request, we identified @e-dard to be a potential reviewer

Is this a breaking change? Even though a time tag/field cannot be queried, there may be clients expecting to be able to write a time tag/field and will break after this change. Seems like dropping the time tag/field and adding a warning in the logs or HTTP response would be a more compatible approach.

That's a good point. I think this would classify as a breaking change.

Comments @pauldix is dropping it ok or should we find a way to make this queryable?

Dropping and adding in the log seems like an ok approach to keep anyone from breaking now. But longer term I think that makes it less usable for new users. If you fail the write then any new user coming in would get immediate feedback that what they're doing isn't supported. Users frequently don't have access to the logs.

I'm ok with the breaking change if we get it before 1.0. Otherwise, drop and warn would have to be it.

I dropped it and I added a TODO.md file to keep track of any issues we can't resolve completely until 2.0. This way, we can remember which things we would want to break when we get to that point and decide then if we want to do it or not.

👍 the 2.0 TODO will be useful. Although it feels like it should be a GH issue of wiki page so updating it doesn't require a PR.

@gunnaraasen my idea was that people would update it whenever we made a change like this where we worked around something. I'll merge this and we can always remove it later if we decide that a wiki would be better.