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

Bug 328724

Summary: Compile Error in pde.ui.templates missing indirect dependency on core.resources
Product: [Eclipse Project] PDE Reporter: Curtis Windatt <curtis.windatt.public>
Component: UIAssignee: PDE-UI-Inbox <pde-ui-inbox>
Status: VERIFIED FIXED QA Contact:
Severity: normal    
Priority: P3 CC: darin.eclipse, Olivier_Thomann, srikanth_sankaran
Version: 3.7   
Target Milestone: 3.7 M3   
Hardware: PC   
OS: Linux   
Whiteboard:
Attachments:
Description Flags
patch none

Description Curtis Windatt CLA 2010-10-26 10:34:33 EDT 
When updating to I20101025-1800 we are now seeing a compile error from pde.ui.templates in ViewRCPTemplate.java.  The class IProject is indirectly required (a superclass method has an IProject argument), but cannot be found.

Downgrading to I2010190800 the error is still visible when opening the file, but it does not cause the compiler to report an error in the problems view.

We do not know if a dependency changed somewhere (someone could have been re-exporting core resources) or if there was a change in the compiler that surfaced this error.

The solution is to add a hard dependency on core resources to pde ui templates.

cc'ing Olivier in case he know about any changes in the compiler that could affect this.
Comment 1 Olivier Thomann CLA 2010-10-26 11:45:15 EDT 
This is a consequence of the fix for bug 324850.
Using a 1.6 method verifier we end up "loading" more types.

Srikanth, do you see another way to fix this issue than adding a dependency on platform resources?
Comment 2 Darin Wright CLA 2010-10-26 14:43:35 EDT 
Created attachment 181756 [details]
patch

Adds dependency on core.resources.
Comment 3 Darin Wright CLA 2010-10-26 14:44:10 EDT 
For M3 we will add the required dependency.
Comment 4 Srikanth Sankaran CLA 2010-10-27 04:36:37 EDT 
(In reply to comment #1)

> Srikanth, do you see another way to fix this issue than adding a dependency on
> platform resources?

I can't think of another way off hand. It was a design issue though
that we were earlier using different verifiers for code < 1.5 and
above for code >= 1.5.
Comment 5 Curtis Windatt CLA 2010-10-27 12:48:54 EDT 
Verified