Newman : Discussion regarding Project Ideas

Open Technologies GSoC
#1

Hey!
Actually i had some doubts regarding the parallel iterations project.

  • Interpretation:
    As I interpreted it, I think the project proposes to:
  1. Introduce parallel run of the iterations using threads.
  2. The max no. of parallel runs will be specified by the user

  • My Idea:
    I think of making this change in postman-runtime instead as that will help us all.
    I think of using worker_threads and have a pool of threads running together which share common data like environment and globals. They communicate with each other through messages.
    And as soon as a thread completes its iteration, it sends a message and hence it is freed and allotted a new iteration.

  • I have identified some challenges to this:

  1. Making the CLI give linear output
  2. Sharing of data
  3. Running Time

My questions are:

  1. Are there any more challenges you can add?
  2. Am I thinking in the right direction and Can I go ahead with this?
  3. Since this is a small project in itself, Can I combine it with another project idea?
1 Like
#2

Also,
I have implemented my thoughts on the Newman Single Request Functionality.
I propose a new command request in parallel with the existing run command.
This command will receive a request with the specified options.
I wish to use some code from ’ curl-to-postman ’ module but not the module itself.
The module receives a curl request string and converts it to the corresponding newman collection. But I think that to create that curl string from the existing options and then make the module parse it again, will double up the computations and make the process slow.
Also, the current options available in the curl-to-postman module are:

  • -A
  • -d
  • -F
  • -G
  • -H
  • -X

These options are quite basic and a lot more options can be integrated in the mentioned functionality.
I propose to add those functions to the ’ curl-to-postmanv2 ’ module after this work gets completed.
All the proposed options have been drafted in the proposal attached below.

My idea is to create a module called curl-parser and place it in the request command.
The parser will use functions from ’ curl-to-postmanv2 ’ to get the basic options onboard and some other functions will be there to take care of the additional options.
This way we’ll avoid the double computations.

Also, to create the code architecture clean, I propose to keep this separate from the run command and once it is built, we try to integrate them step by step.
Since the requests are fundamentally different from collections, we’ll have to configure the CLI and the reporters.
To configure the CLI, I propose to send the name of the command to the reporters and hence, the reporters get the power to decide which information format has to be used.

And for the history feature, I have listed my ideas in the below proposal.
Kindly take some time out to check

#3

I plan to combine these two ideas in the project together.
Is this permitted? @Sharath_Iyengar
Since these ideas were there in the issue tracker before GSoC as well, I have been working on them for 2 months now.
Hence, the project has been planned systematically to ensure good coverage.

#4

@Sharath_Iyengar
Kindly look into this, as this will help me improve my draft.

#5

@aviation-candidate-2 Request your patience and not create duplicate posts for the same point of discussion.

#6

@Sharath_Iyengar
Sorry for this,
I understand the heavy workload and I’ll take care of it.
Also, kindly look into the ideas I’ve documented above.
Also, a review from mentors on my proposal would also give me insights about the sustainability of the project. I’ll make the changes, if required.
Thanks again…

#7

@aviation-candidate-2 Thanks for the proposals. Good job!
One thing though, to make it easier to review and refine, I would suggest that we have two separate docs which I can comment on. It would make it easier to track comments + improve iteratively. :grinning_face_with_smiling_eyes:

Another point I would like to highlight is that you’re free to submit multiple proposals but refrain from combining two ideas. It’s better to improve a single idea itself to include improvements and completing it rather than combining two ideas which result in incomplete work due to deadlines and unplanned obstacles. :slight_smile:

#8

@utkarsh.maheshwari
Thanks a lot for the review.
I’ll do the needful and bifurcate it into two docs and send two proposals.
Apart from this, it is fine right?
Any more improvements?
Also, can you access it?(I mean no edit access or something like that…)

#9

@aviation-candidate-2 I do have some comments but I would wait for you to put them in a document to avoid confusion. :sweat_smile:

#10

@utkarsh.maheshwari
I would do that and ping you here shortly.
Apart from this, can you access it?
I mean regarding edit access and all.
Also, I’ve made the required changes and put it forward.
Kindly add your valuable comments there.

#12

@aviation-candidate-2 I think you’re confused. What @utkarsh.maheshwari meant is to separate both ideas into their own documents not just a document for comments :sweat_smile:

#13

@Sharath_Iyengar
I got that and removed the other one.
I’ll follow up with that draft later.
i just created a new document to summarise everything. :sweat_smile:

#14

Hi mentors and community, great to be here
I am planning to draft a proposal and was wondering which mentor emails to give access to for the google doc, is there someone to reach out to? Thanks!

cc @Sharath_Iyengar @utkarsh.maheshwari

#15

Please provide editor access to gsoc@postman.com and the relevant mentors will be added to it.

Cheers

1 Like
#16

@utkarsh.maheshwari
I have made some changes and added some more things.
Kindly have a look.
That will help me a lot.
Thanks & Regards…

#17

@Sharath_Iyengar
Hi,
Got a second review.
Thanks a lot for the help.

1 Like
#18

@utkarsh.maheshwari
Thanks a lot for your valuable feedback.
As per your review, I’ve made some changes and mentioned them right there…
Kindly have a look and see if it looks good now…
Regards…

#19

@Sharath_Iyengar @utkarsh.maheshwari @pranav-singhal
I have uploaded the final proposal.
Thanks a lot for your valuable feedback.
I have incorporated all the changes and I’ll continue to work towards the project in the Pre- GSoC project. I look forward to working with you fine people and learning a lot of things.

1 Like
#20

@utkarsh.maheshwari @pranav-singhal
I wanted to discuss about the API support for history in the Postman App.
I did mention about it in the proposal and also suggested an implementation.
So are we expecting a possible addition to the Postman API for the same?