I like the idea, together with defining "running" messages with progress information we could be prepared for the future, when our CI systems will be able to report also progress. But I consider this a major change, as the meaning is changing, thus this would be a change in the major version I guess.

Seems fine, probably a bit more consistent with the rest. But I'm not 100 % convinced the change would be worth it. Another approach: We could also just extend the existing running status with the information about progress and send the first message with 0 %. Just brainstorming...

@psss it is true that started is basically running with 0% :) And this way we are a bit more backward compatible :) so :thumbsup: from me

But maybe, it would be good to just make it optional, in case there is no progress, this info would be not provided. Forcing users to set it, if they CI system is not able to support it feels weird

and 0% would be clearly misleading also

Agreed, the new progress field should be optional.

@bookwar are you satisfied or not really?

The optional progress field has been implemented and merged in #13.
@bookwar feel free to reopen if not satisfied with this solution.

@mvadkert it went in a different direction than expected.

So originally I thought we would replace the test.running with test.started.yaml schema and deprecate the old one as unused. And i used the progressbar only to illustrate that message always represents a specific point in time, not the ongoing period. (It is always Past Tense, not Present Continuous :) )

I see that we should have both things: the test.started.yaml as a must have and specific identifier, and test.running.yaml with a progress bar, which is nice to have but not really required.

So I would still have test.started instead of test.running(progress 0%) as a separate entity. Because I can trigger other events on it. And I know there should be one message per test run. While
test.running(progress 0%) - could be a repeatable heartbeat-like message which test system sends regularly.

Although I see the suggested difference between started and running I'm not convinced it is worth creating a new message type if the supposed use case could be handled by running + progress 0%. I would wait until we have a clear use case to prove the benefit.