jmeter-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Philippe Mouawad <philippe.moua...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Release JMeter 3.2 ?
Date Thu, 12 Jan 2017 20:02:19 GMT
On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 8:55 PM, Felix Schumacher <
felix.schumacher@internetallee.de> wrote:

> Am 12.01.2017 um 20:39 schrieb Philippe Mouawad:
>
>> Hello,
>> What do you think of releasing a 3.2 version ?
>>
> I think I said before, that I would like to release often :)
>
>>
>> I see following reasons:
>>
>>     - There is a regression (See bug 60575)
>>
> My fix for 60575 needs tests and review as it changes the contract of the
> method getSendParameterValuesAsPostBody.
>
I reviewed it , it looks ok to me.
I'll double check.

>
> It returned true if there were no parameters (and thus none with a name).
> (Or if getPostBodyRaw() is true)
>
> After the change it returns only true when there are parameters and none
> of those have a name. (Or if getPostBodyRaw() is true).
>



>
> This method is used in POST and PUT as well, but I believe the change to
> be correct in both places. too.
>
>     - We have 9 enhancements and 12  Bug fixes
>>     - Some nice features (at least as a current user I find them
>> interesting
>>     :-) ):
>>        - More space in UI and simpler look
>>        - Up to date Browser based on javafx
>>
> We might have to warn a bit more about the need for javafx (The default
> java for SUSE Leap42.2 seems to have no javafx). Without javafx JMeter will
> start, but the results tree view is missing.
>

I think in this case we should try to fail in a bit cleaner way

>        - Or in response assertion
>>        - Replace feature (partial)+ counting
>>
>> Maybe we can integrate before next release:
>>
>>     - PR-247
>>     - PR-246
>>     - PR-245
>>     - PR-237
>>
>> And upgrade some dependencies:
>>
>>     - jodd which has a lot of perf enhancements that we use in JMeter (for
>>     resources extractions)
>>     - httpcomponents
>>     - maybe more
>>
> I would like to link  the converted pdf tutorials and maybe do a bit of
> minor tweaks to the look and feel of the web pages (less shadows).
>
> Should the sect-num number of the tutorials be continued from those in the
> usermanual section?
>

I think so.


>> Besides, we did a lot of code changes related to sonar, let's release it.
>>
>> A last good thing is that we start to release more often.
>>
> +1
>
> Felix
>
>>
>>
>


-- 
Cordialement.
Philippe Mouawad.

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