| Summary: | Move ControlDecoratorLCA to appropriate package | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [RT] RAP | Reporter: | Benjamin Muskalla <b.muskalla> |
| Component: | RWT | Assignee: | Project Inbox <rap-inbox> |
| Status: | RESOLVED WONTFIX | QA Contact: | |
| Severity: | trivial | ||
| Priority: | P3 | ||
| Version: | 1.3 | ||
| Target Milestone: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | All | ||
| OS: | All | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
|
Description
Benjamin Muskalla
+1, same for ControlDecoratorLCA_Test Although it looks like a typo, it's actually correct. The naming convention for LCAs demand that an "internal." segment is added to the package of the widget. The ControlDecorator lives in an internal package already, another "internal." segment has to be added. If we'd change the LCA lookup code to also accept a single internal in this case we could not differentiate LCAs in the (unlikely) case that we'd have a public and an internal widget of the same name, e.g. foo.Bar and foo.internal.Bar. I think we can live with the "internal.internal" for the rare case of internal widgets. |