Blocked by:

• Log record mutations are visible in next registered processors opentelemetry-specification#4067

Here is another usage of an no-op processor in a processor implementation.

I think we can think about adding it the the SDK as it can be commonly used in processor decorators.

See also: open-telemetry/opentelemetry-go-contrib#5817 (comment)

Originally posted by @pellared in open-telemetry/opentelemetry-go-contrib#5861 (comment)

From open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#4090 (comment):

It is always implied that implementations can go beyond the spec. If there is no desire to ensure common implementation, adding this only adds cruft and potential confusion.

As far as I understand, adding a no-op processor to the SDK would not make the it not compliant with the specification (the SDK should be still compliant).