Hello, In french there is a quotation that says "Qui ne dit mot consent" :-)
Does it mean you're OK for me committing the issue 52674<https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52674>or you want to take some more time to review ? Thank you all. Regards Philippe On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 4:26 PM, Philippe Mouawad < [email protected]> wrote: > Hello, > To clarify a little bit what this enhancement brings: > > Today the Proxy can record standard HTTP sessions that are textual, see > the Mail of 6 feb 2012 > "It was designed for recording standard HTTP sessions; these are not > binary" > And particularly Issue 49039 > > > Although it is limited to Textual HTTP Sessions, lot of work in it can be > reused to record AMF Sessions , Silverlight sessions or other binary > protocols. > > The idea behind the enhancement is to propose the following: > > - Plugin implementor will be able by implementing a SampleCreator > subclass to reuse 90% of proxy feature without duplicating lot of code: > - All Header work > - Sampler transmission to a Target once it's created , > - ie, all the work done in patched HttpRequestHdr which is big + > the ability to customize each of the methods in DefaultSamplerCreator > (as > Struts Base class was build for example) > > Another idea is to be able to customize the created Sampler, a direct use > I see is for example is during a recording of a JSON, GWT or REST > protocols, I as a user had to go on each sampler after recording and switch > to RAW POST BODY (which means 40 clicks for 20 samplers), with current > enhancement I can just subclass DefaultSamplerCreator and register it for > GWT Content type and just set the property to switch it to RAW POST BODY. > > Hope it's clearer. > Regards > Philippe > > Today the Proxy feature can only be used to record HTTP Textual > > On Sun, Feb 26, 2012 at 9:04 PM, Philippe Mouawad < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> Hello, >> I submitted a patch for >> 52674<https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52674> >> Hope you can have a look at it soon. >> >> I didn't update Tests yet, if you think it's OK then I will update them. >> >> Regards >> Philippe >> >> >> On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 11:30 PM, Philippe Mouawad < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Hello Sebb, Milamber, Rainer, >>> Did you have time to look at: >>> >>> - 52618 <https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52618> >>> >>> Do you think patch should be applied ? >>> >>> >>> Also I would like to have your opinion regarding : >>> >>> - 52674 <https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52674> >>> >>> I started an implementation, should I provide a patch or commit it >>> directly ? >>> >>> My idea is the following: >>> >>> - Either introduce 2 interfaces: >>> >>> >>> 1. SamplerFactory with following method: >>> 1. createSampler(String contentType) => Called in >>> HttpRequestHdr#getSampler() >>> 2. SamplerCustomizer with following method: >>> 1. customizeSampler(HttpSamplerBase sampler) => Called in >>> HttpRequestHdr#getSampler() >>> 2. fillBody(byte[] rawPostBody) => Called in >>> HttpRequestHdr#getSampler() >>> >>> >>> - Or introduce only one SamplerProvider: >>> - createSampler(String contentType) => Called in >>> HttpRequestHdr#getSampler() >>> - customizeSampler(HttpSamplerBase sampler) => Called in >>> HttpRequestHdr#getSampler() >>> - fillBody(byte[] rawPostBody) => Called in >>> HttpRequestHdr#getSampler(): >>> - Default implementation would do what is done today inside if >>> ((!HTTPConstants.CONNECT.equals(getMethod())) && >>> (!HTTPConstants.GET.equals(method))) { >>> - Other protocols would handle it another way >>> >>> -- >>> Regards. >>> Philippe Mouawad. >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> Cordialement. >> Philippe Mouawad. >> >> >> >> > > > -- > Cordialement. > Philippe Mouawad. > > > > -- Cordialement. Philippe Mouawad.
