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

Bug 368103

Summary: Assignment of the technical name of the tree becomes invalid
Product: [Technology] Jubula Reporter: hft_10 <72botu1bif>
Component: RCAssignee: Project Inbox <jubula.rc-inbox>
Status: CLOSED INVALID QA Contact: Oliver Goetz <Oliver.Goetz>
Severity: normal    
Priority: P3 CC: Achim.Loerke, alexandra.schladebeck
Version: unspecified   
Target Milestone: ---   
Hardware: PC   
OS: All   
Whiteboard:

Description hft_10 CLA 2012-01-08 08:20:23 EST 
Hi,
I'm testing a tree. 
I assigned my tree on object mapping, assigment became invalid after each restart of AUT or my tree (test) and appears a new technical node with almost the same information.

Only difference that appears in the properties view, is the numbers at the end of the DPS.TreeView. It stands as ###1 for the orginal tree (associated tree -before restart)   and  ###4 for  second tree (after restart).
So the two technical names are indeed different based on one of the steps in the hierarchy.

Their full names  in the properties view are:
DPS.TreeView_DPSTreeVariant_LineBalanceStandard@@@TEST_TAKTUNG###1 and
DPS.TreeView_DPSTreeVariant_LineBalanceStandard@@@TEST_TAKTUNG###4.

The detail of my problem also be found in Jubula Forum under the title "assignment of the technical name is invalid“
Comment 1 Alexandra Schladebeck CLA 2012-02-17 08:09:35 EST 
Is the DPS.TreeView a component that is named as such in your software (it doesn't look like one of our generated names). If so, is it possible that your AUT is causing the "rename" (with 1 or 4)? If this were the case, then that may explain the behaviour - if items have a name, then we assume that this name is unique and it is therefore weighted more importantly (as defined in the object mapping configuration), meaning that smaller changes are more likely to result in objects not being found. 

If however, your AUT is not responsible for renaming the DPS.TreeView with a new number, then add this information to the ticket and we will see if our mapping is making the mistake of adding numbers to non-generated names. 

To simplify any further analysis on our part, please add all relevant details (images etc) from the forum post to this ticket.
Comment 2 Achim Loerke CLA 2012-03-09 08:02:29 EST 
No information available, seems not important.