Sorry, I was unclear - I think the "Log Errors" checkbox is still
needed on the listener too.

I don't propose changing the Listener GUI interface to move the "Log
Errors" checkbox, apart from adding a "log result data if error"
checkbox to the config element.

==

I'm not keen on having to edit the JMX file - in fact, as far as I can
see it won't work, because the non-GUI Listener is created at
run-time.

So I am proposing adding a property that can be used by the non-GUI
Listener to determine if it should log result data for errors only.
This would correspond with the new config checkbox.

==

I'm not sure if any other result fields need to be independently
configurable for successful/unsuccessful samples.

This could make the config GUI very large, unless there were two per
listener perhaps?

Not tested this, but I think one can have two Listeners writing to the
same file, one with "Log errors only" selected, and each can have
different options.

[This does not work for the non-GUI listener, however.]

S.
On 5/9/05, Michael Stover <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I still see "Log Errors" on the listener being useful too.  As for non-
> gui running, I think the new jmx file format makes editing listener
> properties easy enough to be something to consider.
> 
> -Mike
> 
> On Mon, 2005-05-09 at 16:07 +0100, sebb wrote:
> > I did consider using the Listener Config.
> >
> > However that gives a problem for non-GUI runs, as there is no way to
> > configure the automatic listener (apart from via properties).
> >
> > I guess there's no real need for a "Log Errors" checkbox to be added
> > to the Test Plan - it could just be done via a property, which I was
> > going to add anyway.
> > Indeed, do we need the Functional test checkbox?
> >
> > I think the "Log Errors Only" checkbox is better as a separate item -
> > it defines when to log, the config defines what. Besides, moving it
> > might invalidate a lot of test plans. However, result data should only
> > be logged if the config says to do so.
> >
> > S.
> > On 5/9/05, Michael Stover <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > That all sounds reasonable.  But, what about making the listener config
> > > do it all - ie, let users indicate what to save normally, what to save
> > > on errors etc.  I think that makes more sense than the ad-hoc checkbox
> > > on the TestPlan object approach.
> > >
> > > -Mike
> > >
> > > On Sun, 2005-05-08 at 11:53 +0100, sebb wrote:
> > > > Functional mode does not work currently in 2.1.
> > > >
> > > > Whilst looking into this, I noticed that "Log Errors only" does more
> > > > in 2.0 than just prevent successful results from being sent to the
> > > > visualizers - it also behaves like Functional Test mode for failed
> > > > results, in that the result Data is written to the test log.
> > > >
> > > > In 2.1 at present, "Log Errors only" behaves as I expected, i.e. it
> > > > suppresses successful results from appearing in the Listener (and its
> > > > log file) and it does not affect the data written to the log file.
> > > >
> > > > Seems to me it would be useful to extend the Test Plan GUI to add an
> > > > option to log Result Data for errors only. This would be useful for
> > > > checking why an assertion failed.
> > > > It would also be useful to add an equivalent property so the mode
> > > > could be set from the command line.
> > > >
> > > > ==
> > > >
> > > > I'd also like to suggest a change in the way Functional mode is 
> > > > implemented:
> > > >
> > > > At the moment, Functional Test mode is stored as a property by
> > > > TestPlan, and ResultCollector then stores it as a static variable.
> > > >
> > > > There will only ever be one Test Plan class in a Test Plan, so it
> > > > would be easy to add static methods to it to return the current
> > > > settings for Functional Test Mode (and my proposed Error Result Data
> > > > mode). This would make it easier to check (at present the setting is
> > > > copied to the ResultCollector class by scanning the classes.)
> > > >
> > > > [The TestPlan.FUNCTIONAL_MODE property would need to be kept so as to
> > > > be saved in JMX files]
> > > >
> > > > ==
> > > >
> > > > WDYT?
> > > >
> > > > S.
> > > >
> > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >
> > >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to