jmeter-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Antonio Gomes Rodrigues <ra0...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Release a 3.0
Date Wed, 13 Jan 2016 21:18:12 GMT
Hi

2016-01-13 21:43 GMT+01:00 Philippe Mouawad <philippe.mouawad@gmail.com>:

> On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 5:28 PM, Antonio Gomes Rodrigues <ra0077@gmail.com
> >
> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > My opinion
> >
> > I think it's a good idea to rename to 3.0 the next release, because:
> > Old release of JMeter have bad reputation (complex to use, bad
> performance,
> > etc.) to people
> > People think that JMeter evolve slowly (I have even heard it from an
> Apache
> > (not JMeter) commiter
> > Same reason than Milamber
> >
> > Remove old things (HC3.1 support, etc.) is great to because each time I
> > show JMeter to someone, he is afraid by the GUI
> >
> > Remove some listener is great to (the two proposed by Philippe Mouawad)
> and
> > maybe other (I think about Monitor Results,
>
> +1 I think there are now better ways to do this and jmeter-plugins has 1
>
>
> > Graph Results,
>
> +0, It can be useful in Debugging maybe
>
>
> > Assertion Results
> >
> I prefer your idea of debug listener than removal, because from
> Stackoverflow questions, I think this one is used
>
> >
> > About listener I think it will be great to brain storming about them
> > because I think:
> > they are not modern
> > it misses some very interesting/important (some are present in JMeter
> > plugins) while JMeter have some very few helpfull
> >
>
> I tend to think that new report dashboard feature answers this. As we do no
> favor GUI testing, I am not sure we should enhance this with.
> For live graphing, we should I think enhance BackendLIstener with a JDBC
> persister at least.
>
I think too

My complete opinion
Have the new report dashboard feature to have a complete report at the end
of the load test
Have BackendLIstener to live graphing. Have a great live graphing allow to
check the load test and stop/modify it if it's necessary (bad
configuration, bad data, etc.). It's usefull too for some test (for example
chekc in live the result of a chaos monkey)
Only keep a few listeners in JMeter core (deprecate it and remove it)
Install JMeter Plugins to have more listener if we want to display graphic
in JMeter


For the moment I have not test report dashboard feature but the screenshot
I have seen are great. I will check them asap to check if something is
missing

About BackendLIstener I have already test it and it's great. Maybe it need
some GUI improvement and new supported backend (ElasticSearch, database)


>
>
> >
> > I think it will be great to separate the listener in two parts:
> >
> Nice idea.
>
>
> > listener (all the interesting listener (Aggregate Graph, Response Time
> > Graph, etc.)
> > debug listener (Assertion Results, JSR223 Listener, etc.)
> >
> > It will be great to have project which regroup jmx files + results + data
> > files like commercial tools (a zip file is sufficient)
> >
> Can you clarify this ?
>
Instead having one or more JMX files + data files (csv) + result load test
files (csv, etc.) I think it will be better to have a single file which
contains all these files.
Or two files (one for the load scripts + data and the other for the results
files)

It will allow to easily send to a collegue the complete script with all
necessary files (csv, etc.)
The same to send the result of a load test



>
> >
> > It will be great to have 2 modes to hide some sampler/listener/etc.
> > One for newcomer and another for expert.
> > It will allow to don't scary newcomers the first time he launch JMeter
> >
> I like this idea, knowing that we have this property that we could use:
> #jmeter.expertMode=true
>
> >
> > Or have one mode by technology tested (http, database, etc.) + expert
> mode
> > will all
> >
> > Maybe remove some timer (I don't know is they are all used)
> >
> I think that all of them have their use but maybe put some only in expert
> mode.
>
> Another field of deprecation is maybe the BSF elements that seem to me
> better replaced by JSR223 elements.
>

+1

>
> Anyway thanks for all those ideas.
>
> >
> > Antonio
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > 2016-01-08 0:48 GMT+01:00 Milamber <milamber@apache.org>:
> >
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > For me, the jump to 3.0 must be done for next version.
> > >
> > >
> > > Remember: JMeter 2.0.0 was release in 2004, so 12 years ago and 23
> > > versions have been release since!
> > >
> > > A lot of works since 2004 on the user interface (the toolbar, sampler
> > > forms, graphical listener, etc.)
> > >
> > > A lot of works under the woods, to improve the JMeter internal
> > > performance, the samplers like HTTP request (default HC4), the parallel
> > > resource download, etc)
> > >
> > > A lot of works to improve the user experience (like the Regexp tester,
> > the
> > > templates box, the search on the JMeter tree, log pane, OS integration
> > for
> > > copy/paste, POST body for WS request, etc.)
> > >
> > > Recently, a lot of works on the website to refresh the design (and
> logo)
> > > (a lot of this changes will publish on the next release)
> > >
> > > IMHO, the bump to JMeter 3.0, exceptionally can not only based on the
> new
> > > behaviors since the previous version (N-1) or API changes, but we need
> to
> > > consider the works of all developers since 2004. (and after change to a
> > new
> > > number rules)
> > >
> > >
> > > Apache JMeter isn't comparable with project like Commons or HTTPClient
> on
> > > the versions rules. Commons/HC are mainly use as a framework inside
> > another
> > > software (like JMeter). JMeter is mainly use a as end user software,
> the
> > > API (break/don't break) isn't the alone criteria to change the versions
> > > number. The UI and the engine must be consider to the next release
> > number.
> > >
> > > Last reason to change : The users may be confused with a 2.x version
> from
> > > 2004 (works only with Java 1.4, some jvm args are now incompatibles)
> and
> > a
> > > 2.14 version which require Java 7.
> > >
> > >
> > > Milamber
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On 05/01/2016 11:01, sebb wrote:
> > >
> > >> On 4 January 2016 at 18:23, Philippe Mouawad <
> > philippe.mouawad@gmail.com>
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> First Happy new year 2016 !
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> On Mon, Jan 4, 2016 at 4:26 PM, sebb <sebbaz@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> JMeter does not have a formal policy for major/minor version release
> > >>>> updates.
> > >>>> However historically major veresion changes have been associated
> with
> > >>>> major changes.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> I am proposing to follow what seems to become a standard in
> versioning
> > >>> refering to a proposal from a scientist working on the subject.
> > >>>
> > >> http://semver.org/ says:
> > >>
> > >> Increment the MAJOR version when you make incompatible API changes,
> > >>
> > >> We are not doing that.
> > >>
> > >> Also other ASF projects such as Commons and HttpClient require major
> > >>>> version bumps when removing deprecated code.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> So isn't this what we are doing as we dropped 4 classes
> corresponding
> > to
> > >>> deprecated elements. And we will deprecate some more.
> > >>> But the main idea behind this is that next version contains major
> > >>> features
> > >>> which I think deserve this change.
> > >>>
> > >> What features are you referring to?
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>> I don't think the proposed changes warrant a major version bump.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> I don't understand, but if we don't come to an agreement I propose
> to
> > >>> run a
> > >>> vote on this although it would be better to avoid it.
> > >>>
> > >>> On 3 January 2016 at 15:36, Milamber <milamber@apache.org> wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> I agree with a new release with a new version number system,
and
> with
> > >>>>> the
> > >>>>> next release to become 3.0.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Before the next release, I would like add the HiDPI (high
> definition
> > >>>>>
> > >>>> screen)
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> for JMeter (for Linux Gnome/GTK and Windows). Currently I works
on
> > >>>>> this.
> > >>>>> (my new computer have a 3200x1800 resolution on a 13' screen,
> JMeter
> > is
> > >>>>>
> > >>>> very
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> small with the CrossPlatform Swing UI)
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> On 03/01/2016 15:08, Philippe Mouawad wrote:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> Hi Felix,
> > >>>>>> Thanks for answer.
> > >>>>>> I don't think it will be a long hold on the new release,
for me we
> > >>>>>> have
> > >>>>>> these remaining points:
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>      - Integrate HTTPCLIENT 4.5.2 to fix
> > >>>>>>      - 58583 <
> https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58583>
> > >>>>>>         - 57319
> > >>>>>>      - Finalize tests
> > >>>>>>      - 57804 => Waiting confirmation from Rainer or
any other
> member
> > >>>>>> of
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>> the
> > >>>>
> > >>>>>         team
> > >>>>>>         - Deprecation:
> > >>>>>>         - 58791 => I will do it
> > >>>>>>         - Not mandatory but would be nice:
> > >>>>>>         - 58793
> > >>>>>>         - 58790
> > >>>>>>         - 58792 => I will try to stat it
> > >>>>>>         - 58794 => I will start a discussion on this
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> That's all for me, but if you see other things feel free
to add
> it.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Thanks
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Regards
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Philippe M.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> @philmdot
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> On Sun, Jan 3, 2016 at 3:37 PM, Felix Schumacher <
> > >>>>>> felix.schumacher@internetallee.de> wrote:
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Am 01.01.2016 um 19:14 schrieb Philippe Mouawad:
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> Hi,
> > >>>>>>>> Happy new year to the whole team.
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> Any news on this ?
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> I have nothing against a 3.0, but I would not like
it, if the
> > "big"
> > >>>>>>> version change would lead to a long hold up of a new
release.
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> Regards,
> > >>>>>>>    Felix
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> Thanks
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> On Tue, Dec 29, 2015 at 5:19 PM, Philippe Mouawad
<
> > >>>>>>>> philippe.mouawad@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> Hi,
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> Following my proposals to deprecate a certain
number of
> elements
> > >>>>>>>>> that
> > >>>>>>>>> were
> > >>>>>>>>> approved by 2 commiters and knowing that we
have some important
> > new
> > >>>>>>>>> features in this release, I propose to name
next version 3.0
> > >>>>>>>>> instead
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> of
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> 2.14.
> > >>>>>>>>> It would be the occasion to make a big cleanup
in all "oldies"
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> elements
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> and maybe be even more aggressive in the deprecations/removals.
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> And starting from there change our release
naming to follow
> this:
> > >>>>>>>>> - http://semver.org/
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> This has been mentioned by this thread and
I think it's a good
> > >>>>>>>>> idea:
> > >>>>>>>>> -
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>
> >
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/jmeter-dev/201411.mbox/%3CCAFJ7uesG%2BsKiQh_wQ5_iLp%3DJ%2BtSiG5fQ%3D7Pp1CvbJ1kncXo%2B%3Dg%40mail.gmail.com%3E
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> I think in the developers thinking our current naming is not
great,
> > >>>>>>>>> cause
> > >>>>>>>>> one can think every "major" release we do is
a Minor release.
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> --
> > >>>>>>>>> Regards
> > >>>>>>>>> Philippe M.
> > >>>>>>>>> @philmdot
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>
> > >>> --
> > >>> Cordialement.
> > >>> Philippe Mouawad.
> > >>>
> > >> .
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Cordialement.
> Philippe Mouawad.
>

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