GNOME Bugzilla – Bug 733070
scenario: add set_property scenario action
Last modified: 2014-11-09 18:05:01 UTC
Adds a way to make an element have a property set during a scenario
Created attachment 280528 [details] [review] scenario: add set_property scenario action Allows setting element's properties during a scenario. Very useful for testing that elements behave correctly when changing properties during playing state
description, duration=20.0 set-property, target-element-name=videotestsrc0, property-name=name, property-value="test", playback_time=10.0 eos, playback_time=20.0 Example scenario file
Review of attachment 280528 [details] [review]: Just make "target-element-name" a mandatory field and push. ::: validate/gst/validate/gst-validate-scenario.c @@ +868,3 @@ + gboolean ret; + + name = gst_structure_get_string (action->structure, "target-element-name"); Why not make it a mandatory field then?
(In reply to comment #3) > Review of attachment 280528 [details] [review]: > > Just make "target-element-name" a mandatory field and push. > > ::: validate/gst/validate/gst-validate-scenario.c > @@ +868,3 @@ > + gboolean ret; > + > + name = gst_structure_get_string (action->structure, "target-element-name"); > > Why not make it a mandatory field then? Forgot to ask if you see any use case for having 'target-element-type' to set the same property to all elements of the same type. But I guess we can always add a set_property_to_type or something like this later if needed. Will update and push.
I also thought about that, I do not see any use case right now, so I guess it is good to just make the property mandatory for now, and later on we could add a field like that yes :)
Updated and pushed commit db21883c0cdba30587c9822228fe7a71dc49776c Author: Thiago Santos <ts.santos@sisa.samsung.com> Date: Fri Jul 11 15:45:18 2014 -0300 scenario: add set_property scenario action Allows setting element's properties during a scenario. Very useful for testing that elements behave correctly when changing properties during playing state https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=733070
Great, thanks :)