On Saturday, April 9, 2016, Andrey Pokhilko <[email protected]> wrote:

> Accepting bets on the discussion result... I'll better spend the time
> writing code for "plugins market" than to have long discussions. Sorry,
> that's my personal issues.
>
> For me you got the feature idea right, message transferred, so what to
> discuss :)?

are you speaking about the plugin market or unknown element ?

if first one, what can be discussed is the format and way of working.
If unknown element, then it's true dev can start

>
> Andrey Pokhilko
>
> On 04/09/2016 10:21 PM, Philippe Mouawad wrote:
> > what's the problem, let's discuss this in core
> >
> > On Saturday, April 9, 2016, Andrey Pokhilko <[email protected] <javascript:;>>
> wrote:
> >
> >> So you got the idea right. Unfortunately, this can't be done as
> >> third-party plugin, it requires core change.
> >>
> >> Andrey Pokhilko
> >>
> >> On 04/09/2016 10:02 PM, Philippe Mouawad wrote:
> >>> On Saturday, April 9, 2016, Andrey Pokhilko <[email protected] <javascript:;>
> <javascript:;>>
> >> wrote:
> >>>> In fact, I'm already working on "plugins repository" feature. So it
> will
> >>>> be available soon.
> >>>>
> >>>> What could be improved in JMeter regarding situation of unknown plugin
> >>>> in test plan is to still show the test plan, putting some "Unknown
> Class
> >>>> Element" at the place of unknown classes. That would allow reviewing
> >>>> these elements in UI which would be easier than monstrous error
> message
> >>>> currently shown. Although I'd keep the message. Also the plan with
> >>>> "Unknown Element" present wouldn't be available for running. Well,
> >>>> another arguable idea from me, tangential to the subject at hand, so
> >>>> nevermind :).
> >>>>
> >>>> I find this idea interesting.
> >>> The ideal situation for me would be:
> >>> - open the plan
> >>> - Show as you propose unknown element for the missing class with maybe
> >> the
> >>> stacktrace in the gui of this unknown element
> >>> - when saving the plan, the missing class is not  changed so the
> initial
> >>> plan is not corrupt
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> Andrey Pokhilko
> >>>>
> >>>> On 04/09/2016 11:56 AM, sebb wrote:
> >>>>> On 8 April 2016 at 22:40, Vladimir Sitnikov <
> >> [email protected] <javascript:;> <javascript:;>
> >>>> <javascript:;>> wrote:
> >>>>>> Philippe> The idea was interesting because it makes things rather
> >>>> simple.
> >>>>>> What if we take a step back and consider some kind of "JMeter Plugin
> >>>> Market"?
> >>>>> This is tangential to the subject at hand.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> For instance:
> >>>>>> 1) Search & install plugins from within JMeter UI
> >>>>> -1; that would add unnecessary classes to memory.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> However it could be stand-alone.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Though I'm not sure how much work it would save compared with the
> >>>>> effort of creating and maintaining it. That sounds like a good 3rd
> >>>>> party project; it seems OT for JMeter.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> 2) If loading a test plan that references not yet installed plugins,
> >>>>>> JMeter would be able to suggest installing the required ones
> >>>>> JMeter only knows what classes the test plan cannot find.
> >>>>> Who is going to maintain the database of plugin locations and their
> >>>> classes?
> >>>>> Who is going to vet the plugins?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> However it might be possible to improve the error messages that are
> >>>>> produced when test classes cannot be found.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Vladimir
> >>
>
>

-- 
Cordialement.
Philippe Mouawad.

Reply via email to