Hi, I looked through the outstanding bugzilla entries and 39328 looked to be for a similar feature. The GUI part is functional, but is probably somewhat brittle. I did my best, but it's definitely not production quality. (I'm a server-side SW engineer, not a GUI person.) Any help on getting it production quality would be appreciated. I attached a patch file to the 39328 bug with my changes. Only 3 files were modified, so it's pretty self-contained.
/Paul -----Original Message----- From: sebb [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 05, 2006 1:45 PM To: JMeter Users List Subject: Re: Current JMeter development branch Please create a Bugzilla enhancement request. Once created, patches (unified diff format please, as used by Eclipse) can be attached to the issue. Patches sent to mailing lists tend to get mangled and/or forgotten. If you get stuck with the GUI part, just add a note and I can probably finish it. S. On 05/12/06, Paul Kuykendall (PL/EUS) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I've been able to get it working with 1.4. Right now I'm fighting the > GUI config portion of the assertion. Where would the best place for > any patches to be sent, here or the -dev list? > > /Paul > > -----Original Message----- > From: sebb [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, December 05, 2006 12:17 PM > To: JMeter Users List > Subject: Re: Current JMeter development branch > > Java 5 is not on the roadmap at present. > > We have abandoned support for Java 1.3, but there are too many people > still using Java 1.4. There was a long discussion about this earlier > this year. > > You can of course create your own samplers that rely on Java 5. > > S. > On 05/12/06, Paul Kuykendall (PL/EUS) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > It is possible to lump multiple XSDs into one validator. I'll have > > to > > > modify my existing code to not use the Java 5 specific methods, but > > I know it is possible. > > > > Unfortunately the cleanest way of doing it does require the > > javax.xml.validation API. See > > http://www-128.ibm.com/developerworks/xml/library/x-javaxmlvalidapi. > > ht ml for a detailed example. To use multiple XSDs you declare a > > different Source for each XSD then create an array of all Source > > classes that is passed into the factory.newSchema() method. > > > > What is the roadmap for moving to Java 5 as the required JVM? Or is > > it on the roadmap at all? > > > > /Paul > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: sebb [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Tuesday, December 05, 2006 9:56 AM > > To: JMeter Users List > > Subject: Re: Current JMeter development branch > > > > I don't think it's possible to provide multiple files to the > assertion. > > > > However, you can have multiple assertions applied to the same sample > > result. > > > > I don't know anything about the underlying XML API, but unless it's > > possible to provide multiple files to a single validation > > invocation, then using multiple assertions won't be much slower. > > > > Also, I think assertions stop being processed as soon as one fails. > > > > S. > > On 05/12/06, Paul Kuykendall (PL/EUS) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > > > Thanks. > > > > > > I'm trying to extend the XML Schema assertion to make it able to > > > use > > > > multiple XSD files during the validation. Of course, if it's > > > possible > > > > > to do such now, please let me know so I don't waste my time. :-) > > > Thanks! > > > > > > /Paul > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: sebb [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Sent: Tuesday, December 05, 2006 9:44 AM > > > To: JMeter Users List > > > Subject: Re: Current JMeter development branch > > > > > > On 05/12/06, Paul Kuykendall (PL/EUS) > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > What is the current development branch? I saw a note saying > > > > that the main head was out of date. I've checked out > > > > branches/rel-2-2 but want > > > > > > > to make sure it's the right one before poking at it too much. > > > > > > Yes, that's the correct one. > > > > > > Perhaps we should a merge at some point, but it's a _lot_ of work. > > > [Or maybe we could do some judicious renames instead...] > > > > > > > Thanks. > > > > > > > > /Paul > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > -- > > > - 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] > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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]
