Bugzilla – Full Text Bug Listing
| Summary: | [WorkingSets] [CommonNavigator] Project Explorer is empty when there is no window working set | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Eclipse Project] Platform | Reporter: | John Arthorne <john.arthorne> |
| Component: | UI | Assignee: | Francis Upton IV <francisu> |
| Status: | RESOLVED DUPLICATE | QA Contact: | |
| Severity: | normal | ||
| Priority: | P3 | CC: | aleherb+eclipse, eclipse, litrik, mark.melvin, mik.kersten, rolf, steffen.pingel, walter.brunauer, wmitsuda |
| Version: | 3.3 | ||
| Target Milestone: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | PC | ||
| OS: | Windows XP | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
|
Description
John Arthorne
Proposed Patch:
In org.eclipse.ui.ResourceWorkingSetFilter:
Old:
public boolean select(Viewer viewer, Object parentElement, Object element) {
IResource resource = null;
if (workingSet == null) {
return true;
}
New:
public boolean select(Viewer viewer, Object parentElement, Object element) {
IResource resource = null;
if (workingSet == null || (workingSet.isAggregateWorkingSet() && workingSet.isEmpty())) {
return true;
}
Cheers,
Walter
Will someone take a look at this patch? Those UI inconsistencies between Package Explorer and Project Explorer are really annoying and discourages Project Explorer adoption... The patch is consistent with our handling of window working sets. I've applied it, but I dont believe the patch will address the thrust of this bug - the project explorer doesn't use this class so any change to it wont matter. This is IMHO a dup of bug 157877. See also bug 212389 which provides a patch to make the PE use the ResourceWorkingSetFilter. This is a pretty serious problem for Mylyn as well. We have put an extended working set switcher in the Task List, so users are more likely to use working sets. In addition, in order to match the majority of users' expectation, the action to trigger no working set to be selected is "Show All", since this is what happens in the Package Explorer. However, the behavior in the Project Explorer is currently "Hide All". Is there a chance of getting this fixed for 3.4? Let us know if it would help for us to assist, but the patch appears trivial. Any news on this? We have a regular stream of confusion that results from the inconsistency. If it would help Mylyn would be happy to provide a patch as per comment#1. (In reply to comment #5) > Is there a chance of getting this fixed for 3.4? Let us know if it would help > for us to assist, but the patch appears trivial. Is there a chance of getting this fixed for 3.5? We would be happy to assist if there is any additional work. Is there anything else blocking this? *** Bug 157877 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** (In reply to comment #7) > (In reply to comment #5) > > Is there a chance of getting this fixed for 3.4? Let us know if it would help > > for us to assist, but the patch appears trivial. > > Is there a chance of getting this fixed for 3.5? We would be happy to assist > if there is any additional work. Is there anything else blocking this? > Mik, I'm going to take you up on your offer to help. If you could make a test case in the org.eclipse.ui.tests.navigator for this case, I would be much obliged. I would be even more thrilled if you test case can include the case of 212389. I'm going to dup this against bug 212389 where Anton claims his patch will also fix this problem. I'm also going to get this into 3.4.1 if I can get some help with the testing. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 212389 *** (In reply to comment #9) > (In reply to comment #7) > > (In reply to comment #5) > > > Is there a chance of getting this fixed for 3.4? Let us know if it would help > > > for us to assist, but the patch appears trivial. > > > > Is there a chance of getting this fixed for 3.5? We would be happy to assist > > if there is any additional work. Is there anything else blocking this? > > > > Mik, I'm going to take you up on your offer to help. If you could make a test > case in the org.eclipse.ui.tests.navigator for this case, I would be much > obliged. I would be even more thrilled if you test case can include the case > of 212389. I'm going to dup this against bug 212389 where Anton claims his > patch will also fix this problem. I'm also going to get this into 3.4.1 if I > can get some help with the testing. > > *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 212389 *** > Mik, I did the test cases and the fix is awaiting review, it will go into 3.4.1 shortly. Francis: Thanks, and sorry for the slow reply. Is there something else left for me to help out with or are you all set? (In reply to comment #11) > Francis: Thanks, and sorry for the slow reply. Is there something else left > for me to help out with or are you all set? > Everything is all set; things should be much better for 3.4.1; let me know if there are other problems. Excelent, thanks Francis! |