On 4 December 2011 20:22, Milamber <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Le 04/12/2011 20:08, Philippe Mouawad a ecrit : >> Hello Sebb, Milamber, Rainer , All, >> Regarding changes.xml file, don't you think we should make it less >> "textual" and highlight some new features ? >> Or maybe create a new page called "New Features" >> > > Yes, good idea. Perhaps a new page "NewInJMeterX.X.X" in JMeter wiki > with screen-shots (can be update after a 'visual' improvement). > (and a link from changes.xml/html: "Some improvements are detailed on > this wiki page") > > I can initialize this page on Wiki, if you are agreed.
I don't think it should be on the Wiki; it needs to be part of the release archives. That was the idea of the section "Summary of main changes" in changes.xmk Alternatively, there could be a RELEASE-NOTES.txt file at the top level with even more details. But not a Wiki page. Whilst working on fixes, it's enough to > Milamber > >> Because IMHO current page is sometimes hard to understand unless you go to >> bugzilla in details ? >> >> For example I missed some important features in 2.5. >> I think something like Miamber page would be useful: >> >> - >> >> http://blog.milamberspace.net/index.php/2011/08/18/apache-jmeter-2-5-est-sorti-964.html >> >> >> What's your opinion ? >> Regards >> Philippe >> >> On Sun, Dec 4, 2011 at 8:54 PM, Philippe Mouawad <[email protected] >> >>> wrote: >>> >> >>> From my tests, I don't have such a drop in performances (max 2%). >>> I also don't notice degradation on POST particularly. >>> I agree with Sebb, issue are in 2.5 and 2.5.1 so we won't degrade things >>> in a future 2.5.2. >>> >>> Regards >>> Philippe >>> >>> >>> On Sun, Dec 4, 2011 at 5:27 PM, sebb <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> >>>> On 4 December 2011 16:09, Rainer Jung <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On 01.12.2011 22:57, Philippe Mouawad wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Hello Sebb, >>>>>> Don't you think we could make a release ? >>>>>> >>>>>> Lots of important fixes have been made and 2 months have passed since >>>>>> >>>> last >>>> >>>>>> release. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> First of all congrats to the huge progress you are making. >>>>> >>>>> What about BZ52189: "JMeter 2.5.1 slower than 2.4 for HTTP POST >>>>> >>>> requests" >>>> >>>>> Is that problem reproducible and really in the range described in the >>>>> >>>> first >>>> >>>>> comment, or was that due to comparing different http samplers? >>>>> >>>> Not sure; I've not been able to reproduce it yet, and the data so far >>>> does not give much clue as to what is happening. >>>> >>>> >>>>> A drop in throughput from 130 to 80 just because of a newer version >>>>> >>>> would be >>>> >>>>> pretty serious IMHO. Unfortunately I didn't yet have the cycles to try >>>>> >>>> it >>>> >>>>> myself, but wanted to provide a heads up. >>>>> >>>> Agreed; however if the problem is difficult to solve I see no harm in >>>> releasing another version so long as it is no worse than 2.5.1, and so >>>> long as the problem is eventually resolved. >>>> >>>> >>>>> Regards, >>>>> >>>>> Rainer >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Cordialement. >>> Philippe Mouawad. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >
