Some Eclipse Foundation services are deprecated, or will be soon. Please ensure you've read this important communication.

Bug 344590

Summary: Problems while resolving Component Names when first test step is a client operation
Product: [Technology] Jubula Reporter: Tim Winselmann <tim.winselmann>
Component: CoreAssignee: Project Inbox <jubula.core-inbox>
Status: CLOSED WORKSFORME QA Contact: Oliver Goetz <Oliver.Goetz>
Severity: normal    
Priority: P3 CC: alexandra.schladebeck
Version: 0.9.0   
Target Milestone: ---   
Hardware: All   
OS: All   
Whiteboard:
Attachments:
Description Flags
the two error messages none

Description Tim Winselmann CLA 2011-05-03 10:51:51 EDT
Created attachment 194596 [details]
the two error messages

Sometimes component names can not be resolved correctly during the start of a test execution (Stack trace as attached).

It seems, that the component names can not be resolved correctly when the first test step is a client operation (like "ub_app_executeExternalCommand" with Local true in this case). Our component IDs will be resolved with the first operation on the server site (like a real click in the application). 

To reproduce this behavior you have to create a test suite with "ub_app_executeExternalCommand" (the configuration was Command - Kwrite | Expected Exit Code - 0 | Local - true | Timeout in ms - 5000) as first test case.

Interesting is that one error message shows the GUID ('8ab6b08d1a4d08f3011a4d09a496002a') which can not be resolved and in another case the logic component name ('Application').
Comment 1 Alexandra Schladebeck CLA 2011-08-18 06:56:20 EDT
This has also been experienced by a customer who receives the error every time he runs his test when beginning it with an action on the "Application" component. It would seem that our resolution of component names may be always too late in some environments.
Comment 2 Alexandra Schladebeck CLA 2011-08-18 09:33:34 EDT
Scratch that last comment. Although it's theoretically still possible, this particular customer problem was actually a result of an old version of the RCP Plugin.
Comment 3 Alexandra Schladebeck CLA 2013-11-19 05:54:21 EST
From our tests and from forum entries, I can't see that this has been a problem since the issue was entered. Marking as worksforme.
Comment 4 Oliver Goetz CLA 2013-11-19 09:46:58 EST
Closed due to comment 3.