Re: [Technical Users - Corticon] Execution property #restrictResponseToRuleMessagesOnly for JSON not working? - Forum - Corticon - Progress Community

Re: [Technical Users - Corticon] Execution property #restrictResponseToRuleMessagesOnly for JSON not working?

 Forum

Re: [Technical Users - Corticon] Execution property #restrictResponseToRuleMessagesOnly for JSON not working?

  • Hi John,

    Thanks for the answer. As this is for a client project I forwarded the question if a hotfix is needed.

    Also I have an additional question:
    I noticed further differences regarding the functionality of this setting on different levels:
    • If a SOAP request is created from Studio, the executions properties are part of the request XML
      but, if a JSON request is created from the same test, no execution parameters are part of the JSON request
    • The execution property restrictResponseToRuleMessagesOnly cannot be set on a decision service level through either the Java Console or the Web Console. I would expect a similar approach as with the other execution properties.
    • detail: I don't see the entry (commented out) in brms.properties

    Should I make log support cases for these or can this be reviewed as well when looking at restrictResponseToRuleMessagesOnly?


    Kind regards,

    Lucas Nijenhuis
    LNS consulting | +31(0)6-27090186 | www.lnsconsulting.nl

    2016-06-01 19:58 GMT+02:00 John Miller <bounce-jomiller@community.progress.com>:
    Update from Progress Community
    John Miller

    Hi Lucas,

    I've been able to reproduce the problem while executing with a JSON request.  Unfortunately, this is a defect.

    I've created a defect in TeamPulse to track this:  

    teampulseprod.bedford.progress.com/view

    Please let us know if you need this fixed in a Hotfix, otherwise, it will be fixed in our upcoming release of 5.6.

    -John

    View online

     

    You received this notification because you subscribed to the forum.  To unsubscribe from only this thread, go here.

    Flag this post as spam/abuse.


  • Support case 00349284 has been opened for this and defect 43144 has been filed .

    This fix will be available in a 5.5.2.x hot fix which Support will make available to you via case 00349284