Great ! On Wed, Nov 8, 2017 at 2:38 PM, Andrey Pokhilko <[email protected]> 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 <[email protected]> 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 < > [email protected] > >>>> : > >>>> > >>>>> 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.
