Hi Philippe,
I don't reproduce the issue of bug 65885 on JMeter 5.3/5.4.2 (i ask a
simple test case on bugzilla)
Can you revert the commit? we can try to fix the issue before a new RC
if we can find the solve in few days.
Milamber
On 28/04/2022 08:47, Philippe Mouawad wrote:
Hello,
I don't have a fix for now , I didn't look deeply but for now as we don't
have in CSV file the fact the "Ignore status" is set, I don't see how to
fix it.
Since it's a regression, I think we need to revert the change if nobody has
an idea, and start a new release.
What do you think ?
Regards
Philippe
On Thu, Apr 28, 2022 at 10:44 AM Milamber <milam...@apache.org> wrote:
Hi Philippe,
Need to cancel RC2 for have a fix (or a rollback)? or i continue with
the RC process?
Milamber
On 27/04/2022 11:23, Philippe Mouawad wrote:
Hello,
Sorry for late reply @Milamber <mailto:milambersp...@gmail.com> , I
see you're releasing.
I noticed a regression on Reporting that may be problematic, in the
error tables, the assertion message takes precedence on error code
which makes analysis
more complex.
It's a regression introduced by
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65885.
Only when ignore status is checked should this happen.
Regards
On Wed, Apr 27, 2022 at 10:13 AM Milamber <milam...@apache.org
<mailto:milam...@apache.org>> wrote:
Hi,
I will prepare the RC2 today
Milamber
On 23/04/2022 11:02, Felix Schumacher wrote:
>
> What about trying an RC2 of JMeter 5.5?
>
> I updated our dependencies and added a workaround for the UI
problem.
>
> Felix
>
> Am 18.03.22 um 17:35 schrieb Milamber:
>>
>>
>> Ready for RC2? (I think that no?)
>> cc @Vladimir
>>
>> On 16/03/2022 22:42, UBIK LOAD PACK Support wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>> Looks good to me.
>>> Let's do another RC with this.
>>> Regards
>>>
>>> On Wed, Mar 16, 2022 at 6:30 PM Vladimir Sitnikov <
>>> sitnikov.vladi...@gmail.com
<mailto:sitnikov.vladi...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Could we make the setting java version dependant ?
>>>> By default, the setting would be commented in jmeter.properties.
>>>> Then, the code would use the appropriate default value
according to
>>>> Java
>>>> version.
>>>>
>>>> So I suggest changing
>>>>
>>>>
https://github.com/apache/jmeter/blob/53a992c8179f0f64fe1993df34bda6594856cf5e/src/jorphan/src/main/java/org/apache/jorphan/gui/ui/KerningOptimizer.java#L48
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> into something like maxLengthWithKerning = currentJava < 17 ?
-1 :
>>>> 10000;
>>>>
>>>> Vladimir
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ср, 16 мар. 2022 г. в 20:25, Philippe Mouawad <
>>>> p.moua...@ubik-ingenierie.com
<mailto:p.moua...@ubik-ingenierie.com>
>>>>> :
>>>>> Could we make the setting java version dependant ?
>>>>> If it’s worth it as it will introduce additional config
complexity
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards
>>>>> On Wednesday, March 16, 2022, Vladimir Sitnikov <
>>>>> sitnikov.vladi...@gmail.com
<mailto:sitnikov.vladi...@gmail.com>>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>> I would say, that my issue is not a regression and therefore
>>>>>>> should be
>>>>> not
>>>>>> a blocker.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There might be a regression like: "new setting caused
activating
>>>> kerning
>>>>>> for texts smaller than 10K" (or whatever is the default).
>>>>>> So if previously the kerning was always disabled, the new
option
>>>>>> might
>>>>>> unexpectedly activate it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> My assumption was that "it should not hurt since the text
is only
>>>>>> 10K",
>>>>>> however, in reality, it looks like even short texts cause
slowness
>>>>>> for the old JDK.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So I'm inclined to make the default 0 (always disable
kerning in
>>>> response
>>>>>> text areas) for Java <17.
>>>>>> WDYT?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Vladimir
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Cordialement
>>>>> Philippe M.
>>>>> Ubik-Ingenierie
>>>>>
>>>
>>
--
Cordialement.
Philippe Mouawad.
