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: Workbench : Let's drop it ?
Date Wed, 15 Nov 2017 21:04:58 GMT
Hello,
PR merged this evening, I am happy with the change as I feel we removed a
lot of weird conditional codes.

Good by Workbench ! We won't miss you :-)

Thanks for the PR, merged with little modifications to avoid meaning less
popup menus.

I feel we should find a better name to "Non Test Elements":

   - it's negative
   - it's meaningless, it says what they are not, but not what they are

Proposals:

   - Test Building Elements
   - Debug Elements


Regards

Philippe M.

On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 2:54 PM, Artem Fedorov <artem.fedorov@blazemeter.com
> wrote:

> I attached patch in this bug:
> https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61591
>
>
> On Sun, Nov 12, 2017 at 4:05 PM, Ralf Roeber <raro42@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I use the workbench for recording.
> > I propose to add recording information to documentation about workbench.
> > I propose to rename workbench to "temporary elements"
> >
> > -0
> >
> > El 12 nov. 2017 1:33 p. m., "Felix Schumacher" <
> > felix.schumacher@internetallee.de> escribió:
> >
> >
> >
> > Am 10. November 2017 16:07:39 MEZ schrieb Philippe Mouawad <
> > philippe.mouawad@gmail.com>:
> > >If we look at consensus, we have:
> > >
> > >  - 3 (+1) to remove it (Maxime, Antonio and me) with favor to move the
> > >elements inside Test plan as disabled (so backward compat). If we have
> > >a PR
> > >or patch that does that, I'll merge it after testing as much as
> > >possible.
> > > - 1 (-1) or (0) for sebb, do you agree sebb ? what would be your exact
> > >   position ?
> > >
> > >
> > >@Felix, @Milamber, @Vladimir,@Graham, @Mikhail , any thoughts on this ?
> >
> > I only use the workbench for the recorder and the mirror server. If I can
> > place them somewhere else, I personally would be fine with removal of
> > workbench.
> >
> > But I understand sebb's concerns.
> >
> > So it is a weak +1 from me.
> >
> > Felix
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >Thanks
> > >
> > >On Fri, Nov 10, 2017 at 4:01 PM, Andrey Pokhilko <apc4@ya.ru> wrote:
> > >
> > >> I don't see any point for Workbench to exist. Simply disabling
> > >elements
> > >> in-place makes them temporary stored anywhere in test plan.
> > >>
> > >> Do we have a decision to remote it or not? I don't want to spend
> > >> resources if we don't have consensus.
> > >>
> > >> Andrey Pokhilko
> > >>
> > >> 09.11.2017 13:41, sebb пишет:
> > >> > Why not consider how to make the Workbench more intuitive and
> > >useful?
> > >> >
> > >> > On 8 November 2017 at 16:47, Philippe Mouawad
> > >> > <philippe.mouawad@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> >> As you say, it’s oddity.
> > >> >> A tool should be intuitive, this part is not, we cannot always
> > >say,
> > >> rtfm.
> > >> >> You know that lot of people don’t read docs.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Let’s try and see if it is that complex.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> We shouldn’t say , we cannot touch, JMeter is not legacy, so
we
> > >touch ,
> > >> >> break then fix .
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Regards
> > >> >>
> > >> >> On Wednesday, November 8, 2017, sebb <sebbaz@gmail.com>
wrote:
> > >> >>
> > >> >>> On 8 November 2017 at 16:18, Philippe Mouawad
> > >> >>> <p.mouawad@ubik-ingenierie.com <javascript:;>>
wrote:
> > >> >>>> Hello,
> > >> >>>> I’d say Test Plan.
> > >> >>>> I suggest testcompiler ignores them
> > >> >>> That would involve a lot of testing to ensure nothing broke.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> Are you sure it's worth it?
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> There have been other instances where what seems to be a minor
> > >change
> > >> >>> turns out to be far more intrusive than first expected.
> > >> >>> Dropping Workbench seems like such a case to me; it's been
part
> > >of
> > >> >>> JMeter for so long that there are bound to be lots of places
that
> > >> >>> assume it is present.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> I agree that the Workbench is a bit of an oddity, but I think
> > >removing
> > >> >>> it is going to prove much more of a headache than improving
the
> > >> >>> documentation to explain it better.
> > >> >>> And potentially find more uses for it.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>> Regards
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>> On Wednesday, November 8, 2017, Artem Fedorov <
> > >> >>> artem.fedorov@blazemeter.com <javascript:;>>
> > >> >>>> wrote:
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>>> Hello,
> > >> >>>>>
> > >> >>>>> If we dropped WorkBench, in which element we can add
Non-Test
> > >> Elements
> > >> >>>>> (HTTP Mirror Server, HTTP(S) Test Script Recorder,
Property
> > >Display)?
> > >> >>>>> Can we add these Non-Test Elements to Test Plan (root)
or Test
> > >> Fragment?
> > >> >>>>>
> > >> >>>>> Thanks
> > >> >>>>>
> > >> >>>>> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_
> > >> >>>>> source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail>
> > >> >>>>> Без
> > >> >>>>> вирусов. www.avast.ru
> > >> >>>>> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_
> > >> >>>>> source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail>
> > >> >>>>> <#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
> > >> >>>>>
> > >> >>>>> On Wed, Nov 8, 2017 at 4:41 PM, Philippe Mouawad <
> > >> >>>>> philippe.mouawad@gmail.com <javascript:;> <javascript:;>
> > >> >>>>>> wrote:
> > >> >>>>>> Great !
> > >> >>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>> On Wed, Nov 8, 2017 at 2:38 PM, Andrey Pokhilko
<apc4@ya.ru
> > >> >>> <javascript:;>
> > >> >>>>> <javascript:;>> wrote:
> > >> >>>>>>> FYI BlazeMeter will attempt to implement this
change and
> > >contribute
> > >> >>> it.
> > >> >>>>>>> Andrey Pokhilko
> > >> >>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>> 04.11.2017 17:06, Andrey Pokhilko пишет:
> > >> >>>>>>>> I'll need to think about it.
> > >> >>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>> Andrey Pokhilko
> > >> >>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>> 04.11.2017 17:01, Philippe Mouawad пишет:
> > >> >>>>>>>>> On Sat, Nov 4, 2017 at 2:52 PM, Andrey
Pokhilko <apc4@ya.ru
> > >> >>> <javascript:;>
> > >> >>>>> <javascript:;>> wrote:
> > >> >>>>>>>>>> +1 from me, I think it is possible
to automatically move
> > >> >>> elements
> > >> >>>>>> from
> > >> >>>>>>>>>> loaded test plans.
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>> Do you have some time to contribute
a patch for this if you
> > >think
> > >> >>>>> it's
> > >> >>>>>>>>> needed ?
> > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>> Andrey Pokhilko
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>> 04.11.2017 15:18, Maxime Chassagneux
пишет:
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> I never use it, except for
recording script, so +1 for
> > >me.
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> Regards
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> 2017-11-04 13:07 GMT+01:00
Philippe Mouawad <
> > >> >>>>>>> philippe.mouawad@gmail.com <javascript:;>
<javascript:;>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> :
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> Hello,
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> Workbench element is confusing
for beginners who don't
> > >> >>> understand
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> clearly its use.
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> Thinking more about it,
I don't see today why we should
> > >still
> > >> >>>>> keep
> > >> >>>>>>> it.
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> The only advantage of
this element is Non Test Elements
> > >which
> > >> >>>>> would
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> be made available from
Test Plan directly.
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> When running a test those
element would not impact test
> > >plan.
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> The only issue is backward
compatibility, should we try
> > >to
> > >> >>> move
> > >> >>>>>>>>>> elements in
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> workbench under test plan
or just mention a backward
> > >> >>>>>> incompatibility.
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> Users would manually move
there elements to Test Plan.
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> Regards
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>> --
> > >> >>>>>> Cordialement.
> > >> >>>>>> Philippe Mouawad.
> > >> >>>>>>
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>> --
> > >> >>>> Cordialement.
> > >> >>>> Philippe Mouawad.
> > >> >>>> Ubik-Ingénierie
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>> UBIK LOAD PACK Web Site <http://www.ubikloadpack.com/>
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>> UBIK LOAD PACK on TWITTER <https://twitter.com/ubikloadpack>
> > >> >>
> > >> >> --
> > >> >> Cordialement.
> > >> >> Philippe Mouawad.
> > >>
> > >>
> >
>



-- 
Cordialement.
Philippe Mouawad.

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