chore!: refer to resource labels as attributes

[mwear]

Which problem is this PR solving?

• Fixes Use OTEL_RESOURCE_ATTRIBUTES instead of OTEL_RESOURCE_LABELS #1416 (use OTEL_RESOURCE_ATTRIBUTES instead of OTEL_RESOURCE_LABELS)

Short description of the changes

• Key value pairs describing a resource were originally called labels. The terminology in OTel has been updated to use attributes instead. In addition to updating the EnvDetector to use OTEL_RESOURCE_ATTRIBUTES instead of OTEL_RESOURCE_LABELS, this PR updates the rest of the codebase to consistently use attributes instead of labels for Resources.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #1419 into master will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is 100.00%.

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master    #1419   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   94.11%   94.11%           
=======================================
  Files         145      145           
  Lines        4335     4335           
  Branches      883      883           
=======================================
  Hits         4080     4080           
  Misses        255      255           

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
...rces/src/platform/node/detectors/AwsEc2Detector.ts	87.50% <ø> (ø)
.../opentelemetry-exporter-collector/src/transform.ts	96.70% <100.00%> (ø)
...ges/opentelemetry-exporter-jaeger/src/transform.ts	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
...ges/opentelemetry-exporter-zipkin/src/transform.ts	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
...ckages/opentelemetry-exporter-zipkin/src/zipkin.ts	98.46% <100.00%> (ø)
packages/opentelemetry-resources/src/Resource.ts	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
...ry-resources/src/platform/node/detect-resources.ts	96.29% <100.00%> (ø)
...sources/src/platform/node/detectors/EnvDetector.ts	95.55% <100.00%> (ø)
...sources/src/platform/node/detectors/GcpDetector.ts	95.34% <100.00%> (ø)

[mayurkale22]

LGTM

[obecny]

lgtm

[dyladan]

/cc @markwolff since your new packages will need to incorporate these changes

[markwolff]

confirm. I'll resolve the conflicts

[obecny]

I'm wondering one thing here, above all should this be a part of environment instead of accessing process.env directly. I know this under platform node, but still I would be in favour of getting env variables through getEnv(), I'm fine to do it in next PR as it was already like this before, WDYT ?

[dyladan]

I agree, but I think it is outside the scope of this PR.

[dyladan]

Conventional Commits requires that a ! be appended to the commit type or a footer BREAKING CHANGE be added to breaking change commit messages. I have renamed the PR to include the !