| Summary: | [GlobalActions] View gets uninitialized ViewSite in its init method | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Eclipse Project] Platform | Reporter: | Ondrej Chylik <ondrej.chylik> |
| Component: | UI | Assignee: | Douglas Pollock <douglas.pollock> |
| Status: | CLOSED FIXED | QA Contact: | |
| Severity: | normal | ||
| Priority: | P1 | CC: | eclipse, n.a.edgar |
| Version: | 3.0 | ||
| Target Milestone: | 3.0 M9 | ||
| Hardware: | All | ||
| OS: | All | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Bug Depends on: | |||
| Bug Blocks: | 75835 | ||
|
Description
Ondrej Chylik
Sounds like a bug. Stefan, can you look into this one please? Should also check the editor site case. Fix in HEAD along with tests that assert that various site fields have been initialized. Verified in 200405190010 via the test suites. Closing to keep a tidy house. Pardon the spam. The fix for this bug caused Bug 69900. This is a regression over 2.1.3 behaviour, and has to be corrected for 3.0.1 and 3.1. [dpollock@dev eclipse]$ grep -r 'Fix for 59301' org.eclipse.ui.* org.eclipse.ui.tests/Eclipse UI Tests/org/eclipse/ui/tests/api/IWorkbenchPartTest.java,v:@Fix for 59301 org.eclipse.ui.tests/Eclipse UI Tests/org/eclipse/ui/tests/api/MockEditorPart.java,v:@Fix for 59301 org.eclipse.ui.tests/Eclipse UI Tests/org/eclipse/ui/tests/api/MockViewPart.java,v:@Fix for 59301 org.eclipse.ui.tests/Eclipse UI Tests/org/eclipse/ui/tests/api/MockWorkbenchPart.java,v:@Fix for 59301 org.eclipse.ui.tests/Eclipse UI Tests/org/eclipse/ui/tests/api/MockPart.java,v:@Fix for 59301 org.eclipse.ui.workbench/Eclipse UI/org/eclipse/ui/internal/ViewFactory.java,v:@Fix for 59301 org.eclipse.ui.workbench/Eclipse UI/org/eclipse/ui/internal/EditorManager.java,v:@Fix for 59301 org.eclipse.ui.workbench/Eclipse UI/org/eclipse/ui/internal/WorkbenchPartReference.java,v:@Fix for 59301 org.eclipse.ui.workbench/Eclipse UI/org/eclipse/ui/internal/ViewPane.java,v:@Fix for 59301 My goof; I don't believe this is associated with Bug 69900 anymore. Moving back to CLOSED Restoring the original milestone. Nick: Is this a regression over 2.1.3? This is causing another problem with Bug 75835 that is definitely a regression. If this change was just additional functionality, I would recommend reverting it. |