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 <[email protected]> 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:[email protected]> , 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 <[email protected] > > <mailto:[email protected]>> 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 < > > >>> [email protected] > > <mailto:[email protected]>> 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 < > > >>>> [email protected] > > <mailto:[email protected]> > > >>>>> : > > >>>>> 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 < > > >>>>> [email protected] > > <mailto:[email protected]>> > > >>>>> 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. > > > > > > -- Cordialement. Philippe Mouawad.
