Closed hughsimpson closed 11 years ago
I'm not sure if we needed the feature... Everyone, can you comment?
We had difficulty specifying which actors to include/exclude for TSM, so this is intended to solve those issues -- in particular, making 'includeSystemAgents' configurable, and being able to specify mutliple 'inclusions'/'exclusions' should both add some flexibility to the configuration. Plus I think the renamed boolean has a more sensible name, and makes it more obvious what it does.
@pallayr, I think this fixes @lashford's problem. Though next time, be sure to have an issue for a fix before starting the work. (I remember my days in Spring Framework, where a PR without an issue simply got closed without further questions!)
@janm399 :+1: agreed
I have a patch that limits monitoring of actor counts to only the appropriately included actors, if we want that? @lashford was asking for it. Haven't got full test coverage, though -- only on type match so far.
Issue #82
@hughsimpson is there an issue number for that. Please link it to your comment
Goodie.
Previously we were a bit too limited in what we could match with our inclusion/exclusion filters. In addition, the rather confusing 'allowExclusions' boolean has been renamed 'excludeAllNotIncluded'
Fix issue #81