jmeter-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Antonio Gomes Rodrigues <ra0...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: When can we start the release of 3.0 ?
Date Tue, 12 Apr 2016 17:47:44 GMT
Thank to your quick answer

If anybody have the time to do it it will be great

2016-04-12 19:32 GMT+02:00 sebb <sebbaz@gmail.com>:

> On 12 April 2016 at 18:17, Antonio Gomes Rodrigues <ra0077@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Hi Sebb,
> >
> > My opinion is it will be better to merge it for 3.0 because the majority
> of
> > my PR are about HTML report.
> >
> > And the majority of users will see the HTML report for the first time in
> > this release and the first impression is very important.
> >
> > And if you check my PR you can see:
>
> Sorry, but I don't have time to review the changes.
>
> > modification of label to be consistent with other listener and between
> > tables in HTML report
> > modification of some axis label to be more accurate (I have add "average"
> > to avoid user search in documentation which metric is)
> > fix a bug about encoding accent when the HTML report are generated in a
> > French OS
> >
> > It's details but details are very important in my opinion
> >
> > There are PR for other details (one PR to have a better (for me) IHM,
> > another to have another default column sort (more usefull in my opinion)
> >
> > I am planning to fix other details and add some features for 3.1 release
> (I
> > have take some free time to fix the previous PR to 3.0 release before to
> > implement the new one)
> >
> > Antonio
> >
> > 2016-04-12 15:17 GMT+02:00 sebb <sebbaz@gmail.com>:
> >
> >> On 12 April 2016 at 13:50, Philippe Mouawad <philippe.mouawad@gmail.com
> >
> >> wrote:
> >> > Hi,
> >> > I cannot merge before thursday evening.
> >> > Anybody else can ?
> >> > Milamber when do you plan to make the release ?
> >> >
> >> > Should we merge those or wait for 3.1 ?
> >>
> >> wait for 3.1
> >>
> >> > Regards
> >> >
> >> > On Monday, April 11, 2016, Antonio Gomes Rodrigues <ra0077@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Hi all,
> >> >>
> >> >> I have made some PR to allow the user have a better experience with
> 3.0
> >> >>
> >> >> If it's possible, one of you can check my PR and merge it if it's ok
> >> before
> >> >> 3.0 release?
> >> >>
> >> >> Thanks
> >> >> Antonio
> >> >>
> >> >> <
> >> >>
> >>
> https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=oa-2200-b
> >> >> >
> >> >> Garanti
> >> >> sans virus. www.avast.com
> >> >> <
> >> >>
> >>
> https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=oa-2200-b
> >> >> >
> >> >> <#DDB4FAA8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
> >> >>
> >> >> 2016-04-04 23:14 GMT+02:00 Milamber <milamber@apache.org
> >> <javascript:;>>:
> >> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > On 04/04/2016 14:23, Philippe Mouawad wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> Hi,
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> As it appears there is no pending issue to release a 3.0,
 any
> >> volunteer
> >> >> >> to
> >> >> >> act as RM for 3.0 ?
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Yes, with great pleasure for this great new version!
> >> >> >
> >> >> > I can start a release process next Saturday (or Sunday)
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Milamber
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> Regards
> >> >> >> Philippe
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> On Sunday, April 3, 2016, Philippe Mouawad <
> >> philippe.mouawad@gmail.com
> >> >> <javascript:;>>
> >> >> >> wrote:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> As suggested by Felix, I think this enhancement can be delayed
to
> >> next
> >> >> >>> release following 3.0.
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>> If so, @sebb and all, can we start the release process
?
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>> Regards
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>> On Saturday, April 2, 2016, Philippe Mouawad <
> >> >> philippe.mouawad@gmail.com <javascript:;>
> >> >> >>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','philippe.mouawad@gmail.com
> >> >> <javascript:;>');>> wrote:
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>>> On Saturday, April 2, 2016, sebb <sebbaz@gmail.com
> <javascript:;>>
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >> >>>>
> >> >> >>>> On 1 April 2016 at 23:58, Philippe Mouawad <
> >> >> philippe.mouawad@gmail.com <javascript:;>>
> >> >> >>>>> wrote:
> >> >> >>>>>
> >> >> >>>>>> It's developed.
> >> >> >>>>>>
> >> >> >>>>> I know.
> >> >> >>>>>
> >> >> >>>>> Just need to decide which option is best.
> >> >> >>>>>>
> >> >> >>>>> Not possible to decide without knowing how expensive
the
> options
> >> are.
> >> >> >>>>>
> >> >> >>>>
> >> >> >>>> the first option (LRU like) is expensive as per Vladimir
notes.
> >> >> >>>> We could reduce cost by dropping every N additions.
> >> >> >>>> But bear in mind that cost start to be high when we
reach the
> >> limit,
> >> >> >>>> without it GC would have a cost as memory would keep
increasing.
> >> >> >>>> But it is hard to make a comparison
> >> >> >>>>
> >> >> >>>> Option 2 (warn and stop adding) has nearly 0 overhead
> >> >> >>>>
> >> >> >>>> As I wrote, that needs to be resolved.
> >> >> >>>>>
> >> >> >>>>> But we can delay its integration if needed
> >> >> >>>>>>
> >> >> >>>>>> Regardd
> >> >> >>>>>>
> >> >> >>>>>> On Friday, April 1, 2016, sebb <sebbaz@gmail.com
> <javascript:;>>
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >> >>>>>>
> >> >> >>>>>> On 1 April 2016 at 22:37, Philippe Mouawad
<
> >> >> >>>>>>>
> >> >> >>>>>> philippe.mouawad@gmail.com <javascript:;>
> >> >> >>>>>
> >> >> >>>>>> <javascript:;>> wrote:
> >> >> >>>>>>>
> >> >> >>>>>>>> hello,
> >> >> >>>>>>>> I think trunk is now ready for a release.
> >> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >> >>>>>>>> I see no pending bug and I think 3.0
is really expected.
> >> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >> >>>>>>> What about the OOM issue?
> >> >> >>>>>>>
> >> >> >>>>>>> That either needs to be resolved or postponed.
> >> >> >>>>>>>
> >> >> >>>>>>> Are you ok to start ?
> >> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >> >>>>>>>> Thanks
> >> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >> >>>>>>>> --
> >> >> >>>>>>>> Cordialement.
> >> >> >>>>>>>> Philippe Mouawad.
> >> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >> >>>>>>>
> >> >> >>>>>> --
> >> >> >>>>>> Cordialement.
> >> >> >>>>>> Philippe Mouawad.
> >> >> >>>>>>
> >> >> >>>>>
> >> >> >>>> --
> >> >> >>>> Cordialement.
> >> >> >>>> Philippe Mouawad.
> >> >> >>>>
> >> >> >>>>
> >> >> >>>>
> >> >> >>>>
> >> >> >>>> --
> >> >> >>> Cordialement.
> >> >> >>> Philippe Mouawad.
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > Cordialement.
> >> > Philippe Mouawad.
> >>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message