Some Eclipse Foundation services are deprecated, or will be soon. Please ensure you've read this important communication.
Bug 338488 - API Use Reports scan location requires "xml" parent directory
Summary: API Use Reports scan location requires "xml" parent directory
Status: CLOSED DUPLICATE of bug 338490
Alias: None
Product: PDE
Classification: Eclipse Project
Component: API Tools (show other bugs)
Version: 3.7   Edit
Hardware: PC Windows XP
: P3 normal (vote)
Target Milestone: 3.7 M7   Edit
Assignee: Ankur Sharma CLA
QA Contact:
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2011-02-28 18:19 EST by Peter Parapounsky CLA
Modified: 2011-04-18 17:47 EDT (History)
2 users (show)

See Also:


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Peter Parapounsky CLA 2011-02-28 18:19:06 EST
Build Identifier: eclipse-SDK-I20110222-0800-win32.zip

The "API Use Scans" preference allows adding API use scans so they can be compared to the workspace to ensure the API references still exist. I ran into the following problem when I tried it out. My scan report location was accepted as valid in the preference page dialog. However, the API analysis builder didn't report the errors I expected it to report. I spend some time trying to figure why. Eventually, I looked into the source code and found out that at run time, the "UseScanManager.getExactScanLocation()" method looks for a parent "xml" directory and if this directory is not there, it silently interrupts the scan so there is not way to figure out why it didn't produce the expected results. 
I don't understand why is there a requirement the scan report's parent directory to be named "xml". And second, if this is a needed requirement, I think there should be a prominent error displayed, and probably at the time the location is added and validated.

Reproducible: Always
Comment 1 Curtis Windatt CLA 2011-03-01 13:41:25 EST
Ankur, please investigate as soon as possible.  Would this also affect the new use scan task?
Comment 2 Ankur Sharma CLA 2011-04-18 17:47:24 EDT

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 338490 ***