Community
Participate
Working Groups
Build Identifier: WTP 3.2.3 An adopter product that is using the 'org.eclipse.wst.common.modulecore.ui.deploymentAssemblyVerifier' extension point to validate the content of the 'Deployment Assembly' page is running into usability issues when multiple messages need to be displayed. Currently, error/warning messages replace the title in the 'Deployment Assembly' page, greatly limiting the amount of space for messages. There should be a separate panel for displaying error/warning messages. Reproducible: Always
Created attachment 182326 [details] Proposed Patch This patch fixes the UI so that instead of displaying error/warning messages in the title, they are displayed in their own panel at the bottom of the 'Deployment Assembly' page. The problems panels will look similar to the one used in the 'Project Facets' properties page when an error occurs.
looks great - please go ahead and add PMC details to approve this UI change
* Explain why you believe this is a stop-ship defect. Or, if it is a "hotbug" (requested by an adopter) please document it as such. An adopter product that is using the 'org.eclipse.wst.common.modulecore.ui.deploymentAssemblyVerifier' extension point to validate the content of the 'Deployment Assembly' page is running into usability issues when multiple messages need to be displayed. Currently, error/warning messages replace the title in the 'Deployment Assembly' page, greatly limiting the amount of space for messages and making it hard to read long messages (user would have to hover). There should be a separate panel (similar to the problems panel in the 'Project Facets' properties page) for displaying error/warning messages. * Is there a work-around? If so, why do you believe the work-around is insufficient? Users can currently read long error/warning messages by expanding the window or hovering over the message. However, when displaying multiple error/warning messages, they are all appended and displayed in a single line (title line) which makes it greatly limits the available space and makes it unclear to the user how many warnings are being shown. * How has the fix been tested? Is there a test case attached to the bugzilla record? Has a JUnit Test been added? Tested through UI. * Give a brief technical overview. Who has reviewed this fix? The attached patch fixes the UI so that instead of displaying error/warning messages in the title, they are displayed in their own panel at the bottom of the 'Deployment Assembly' page and the panel will be shown below both tabs. The problems panels will look similar to the one used in the 'Project Facets' properties page when an error occurs. This panel will only be shown when error/warnings have been found. This patch has been reviewed by Chuck. * What is the risk associated with this fix? Low.
Aidyl, can we have a screenshot attached to the bug that shows an example view of the proposed solution?
Created attachment 182873 [details] Proposed Patch - Updated Small (2 line) change to fix a height layout problem with the error/warning messages.
Created attachment 182874 [details] Screen capture of view
Thanks, Aidyl. I know the JBoss (RedHat) guys invested a lot of effort in the Deployment Assembly page. I just want to check that this UI change does not come as a surprise to them in the service release. Rob, Max, can you take a look at this UI change for 3.2.3 that affects the Deployment Assembly page. Please, state if you are OK with it, or if it affects your adopter's product in a negative way. And one small technical comment from me. I think that, from usability point of view, it is a good idea to sort the messages by type - first list the error messages, and then the warnings.
Created attachment 183043 [details] Proposed Patch - Update 2 Thanks for the comments Kaloyan. I updated the patch to list all the error messages first and then the warnings.
Created attachment 183045 [details] Updated screen capture of view Lists errors and then warnings.
Thanks, Aidyl. I've sent a mail to Rob and Max to notify them that we are waiting for their comment.
This looks fine... I'm not sure whether there should only be one verifier for each page type, but I'm not willing to delay the progress for this until I can think up a use-case that would require more than one. Looks good.
Code checked into 32M and HEAD for WTP 3.2.3 and 3.3
