Hi, Thanks for reply. Don'twe need to introduce a new config property to distinguish between methods with entity (put, post) and methods without (get, head ...)
Thanks On Thursday, March 3, 2016, Felix Schumacher < felix.schumac...@internetallee.de> wrote: > > > Am 2. März 2016 22:52:55 MEZ, schrieb Philippe Mouawad < > philippe.moua...@gmail.com <javascript:;>>: > >Hi Felix, > >Do we delay this one for 3.1 ? > > No. I will give it another try in the next days. I think it can be solved > easily. > > Felix > > >Thanks > > > >On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 8:48 PM, Felix Schumacher < > >felix.schumac...@internetallee.de <javascript:;>> wrote: > > > >> Am 29.02.2016 um 20:39 schrieb Felix Schumacher: > >> > >>> Am 29.02.2016 um 20:36 schrieb fschumac...@apache.org <javascript:;>: > >>> > >>>> Author: fschumacher > >>>> Date: Mon Feb 29 19:36:14 2016 > >>>> New Revision: 1732939 > >>>> > >>>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1732939&view=rev > >>>> Log: > >>>> Revert changes made by r1732937 > >>>> At least HTTPHC4Impl uses HttpWebDav#isWebdavMethod in a way, that > >is > >>>> incompatible to this change. > >>>> > >>>> Was: HTTP Request : Make Method field editable so that additional > >>>> methods (Webdav) can be added easily > >>>> > >>>> Bugzilla Id: 59083 > >>>> > >>>> Modified: > >>>> jmeter/trunk/bin/jmeter.properties > >>>> > >jmeter/trunk/src/core/org/apache/jmeter/gui/util/JLabeledRadioI18N.java > >>>> (props changed) > >>>> > >>>> > > >jmeter/trunk/src/protocol/http/org/apache/jmeter/protocol/http/config/gui/UrlConfigGui.java > >>>> > >>>> > > >jmeter/trunk/src/protocol/http/org/apache/jmeter/protocol/http/sampler/HTTPHC4Impl.java > >>>> > >>>> > > >jmeter/trunk/src/protocol/http/org/apache/jmeter/protocol/http/sampler/HTTPSamplerBase.java > >>>> > >>>> > > >jmeter/trunk/src/protocol/http/org/apache/jmeter/protocol/http/sampler/HttpWebdav.java > >>>> jmeter/trunk/xdocs/changes.xml > >>>> jmeter/trunk/xdocs/images/asf-logo.gif (props changed) > >>>> > >>> I wonder how I got this change in here. Will try to get the orginal > >(new) > >>> logo in again. > >>> > >> Seems the logo wasn't replaced by my revert. Should we delete the > >image? > >> It doesn't seem to be used. > >> > >> Regards, > >> Felix > >> > > -- Cordialement. Philippe Mouawad.
