Some Eclipse Foundation services are deprecated, or will be soon. Please ensure you've read this important communication.

Bug 312890

Summary: Closing last part in a stack may bring other parts up
Product: [Eclipse Project] e4 Reporter: Remy Suen <remy.suen>
Component: UIAssignee: Remy Suen <remy.suen>
Status: RESOLVED FIXED QA Contact: Eric Moffatt <emoffatt>
Severity: major    
Priority: P3    
Version: 1.0   
Target Milestone: 4.1 M1   
Hardware: All   
OS: All   
Whiteboard:

Description Remy Suen CLA 2010-05-14 07:33:25 EDT 
1. Start your inner Eclipse.
2. Close the 'Javadoc' and 'Declaration' view without activating them.
3. Close the 'Problems' view.
4. The 'Javadoc' view has returned!

Caused by changes to support bug 309248. The close listener used to use the renderer's context to request a part service. This is no good because that's the application's context, we should use the part's context instead. That is no good because a part doesn't have a context until it's rendered (per step 2). As a workaround, I'll fall back to the renderer's context for now if the part doesn't have a context until we have API to retrieve the proper context parent (with consideration of placeholders).
Comment 1 Remy Suen CLA 2010-05-14 07:35:55 EDT 
(In reply to comment #0)
> As
> a workaround, I'll fall back to the renderer's context for now if the part
> doesn't have a context until we have API to retrieve the proper context parent
> (with consideration of placeholders).

Workaround released to HEAD. Leaving bug open until we can swap it out for the API.
Comment 2 Eric Moffatt CLA 2010-06-21 11:12:00 EDT 
Remy, is this still an issue? Will we be getting to it before release ?
Comment 3 Remy Suen CLA 2010-06-21 11:15:08 EDT 
(In reply to comment #2)
> Remy, is this still an issue?

The workaround hasn't been removed yet. So technically, yes.

> Will we be getting to it before release ?

Probably not. It would depend on how difficult it is to get the proper context.
Comment 4 Remy Suen CLA 2010-08-04 10:01:14 EDT 
(In reply to comment #3)
> The workaround hasn't been removed yet. So technically, yes.

The workaround has been swapped out.