Bugzilla – Full Text Bug Listing
| Summary: | New OSGi Console needs polish | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Eclipse Project] PDE | Reporter: | Dani Megert <daniel_megert> | ||||||
| Component: | UI | Assignee: | Chris Aniszczyk <caniszczyk> | ||||||
| Status: | RESOLVED FIXED | QA Contact: | |||||||
| Severity: | normal | ||||||||
| Priority: | P3 | CC: | ankur_sharma, caniszczyk, curtis.windatt.public, darin.eclipse, tjwatson | ||||||
| Version: | 3.6 | Flags: | darin.eclipse:
review+
|
||||||
| Target Milestone: | 3.6 RC1 | ||||||||
| Hardware: | PC | ||||||||
| OS: | Windows XP | ||||||||
| Whiteboard: | |||||||||
| Attachments: |
|
||||||||
|
Description
Dani Megert
Chris, are you able to polish your contribution some more? A few people have mentioned getting burned by the dev/target console. Perhaps in the title of the console we could add a longer description. OSGi Console enhancement request is bug 162420 Polish or remove ;-) (In reply to comment #1) > Chris, are you able to polish your contribution some more? > > A few people have mentioned getting burned by the dev/target console. Perhaps > in the title of the console we could add a longer description. 'Development OSGi Console' would that work? I'm not sure what name to use. Who has been burned? I've only heard good things from people about this feature. You can effectively burn yourself via the plug-in registry view and enabling the Advanced Operations option. I'll update the code to only have one console... I don't think we need multiple ones and should just be a singleton. Adding Tom to see if he has any insights here. (In reply to comment #3) > 'Development OSGi Console' would that work? I'm not sure what name to use. Who > has been burned? I've only heard good things from people about this feature. > You can effectively burn yourself via the plug-in registry view and enabling > the Advanced Operations option. The feature is useful, it's just that when you are debugging a target with the -console argument, then open up an OSGi console, you end up with two very similar looking consoles. If you type your commands into the incorrect one you get the incorrect results. I saw a comment a bug where someone had hit this. I also think Ankur made the mistake as well. I just think that a gentle reminder to the user would be useful. 'Development OSGi Console' is ok. I don't have any better suggestions, 'OSGi Console (Host IDE)' or something that distinguishes it from the target/runtime workbench. (In reply to comment #3) > (In reply to comment #1) > > Chris, are you able to polish your contribution some more? > > > > A few people have mentioned getting burned by the dev/target console. Perhaps > > in the title of the console we could add a longer description. > > 'Development OSGi Console' would that work? I'm not sure what name to use. Who > has been burned? I've only heard good things from people about this feature. > You can effectively burn yourself via the plug-in registry view and enabling > the Advanced Operations option. I don't have a good name for this. Is the concern that the user will not know that this console view is an OSGi console for the running Eclipse instance (the one running the actual workspace instance)? I am not sure I understand the term "dev workspace console" from comment 0. Equally confusing is the term "Development OSGi Console". To me that would seem to indicate that the console is connected to some instance that is running bundles I am developing in my workspace. Perhaps "Workspace OSGi Console". I also like Curtis's suggestion 'OSGi Console (Host IDE)'. If we really want to inform the user, then the console view could print some statement at the start of the console ... WARNING: This console is connected to the running instance of the OSGi Framework for the open workspace. > > I'll update the code to only have one console... I don't think we need multiple > ones and should just be a singleton. I agree with that. Only one is ever needed. >I also like Curtis's suggestion 'OSGi Console (Host IDE)'. Goes into the right direction. I don't like having braces in titles too much. How about: "Host OSGi Console" plus a warning dialog which has a 'Don't ask again' check box. >I don't think we need multiple ones and should just be a singleton. I agree too. (In reply to comment #6) > How about: "Host OSGi Console" Sounds good to me > plus a warning dialog which has a 'Don't ask again' check box. A dialog interrupting the user seems more annoying then helpful. If we need a message, it should be displayed in the console. >If we need a message, it should be displayed in the console.
Would be fine too.
Targetting this for this week. Created attachment 167943 [details]
org.eclipse.pde.ui.patch
I made the console a "singleton" and added a warning message to the console.
I think this is good enough, I would prefer to not rename the console.
I think renaming is important to avoid the obvious confusion - even though we have a warning inside the console. Created attachment 167946 [details]
org.eclipse.pde.ui.patch
An updated patch with naming the console "Host OSGi Console" instead of "OSGi Console"
I also updated the console header to show "Host OSGi Console [...]". Note that you have to start with -clean to see the new "Host OSGi Console" in the console drop down menu. +1 Applied/Fixed. I'll open a new bug for an action to close the console. Fixed. |