Some Eclipse Foundation services are deprecated, or will be soon. Please ensure you've read this important communication.
Bug 347655 - Need to extend AbstractScoutEditorPart#closePart
Summary: Need to extend AbstractScoutEditorPart#closePart
Status: CLOSED FIXED
Alias: None
Product: z_Archived
Classification: Eclipse Foundation
Component: Scout (show other bugs)
Version: unspecified   Edit
Hardware: PC Windows Vista
: P3 enhancement (vote)
Target Milestone: ---   Edit
Assignee: Andreas Hoegger CLA
QA Contact:
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2011-05-30 10:00 EDT by Claudio Guglielmo CLA
Modified: 2021-08-19 11:05 EDT (History)
3 users (show)

See Also:
zimmermann: indigo+
zimmermann: juno+

Attachments
Patch which allowes to override the essential part (1.03 KB, patch)
2011-05-30 10:03 EDT, Claudio Guglielmo CLA 		zimmermann: iplog+
Details | Diff
View All Add an attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.)

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Claudio Guglielmo CLA 2011-05-30 10:00:18 EDT 
Build Identifier: 

I need to replace getSite().getPage().closeEditor(this, false); with custom code. Even though closePart is public overriding the whole function does not work because it uses private members (locks) which I cannot access. 

It would be great if either those member were public or if the closing of the editor would be separated as a protected function.

Reproducible: Always
Comment 1 Claudio Guglielmo CLA 2011-05-30 10:03:06 EDT 
Created attachment 196900 [details]
Patch which allowes to override the essential part
Comment 2 Andreas Hoegger CLA 2011-07-15 17:33:29 EDT 
Patch applied for Indigo SP1 and trunk. Also changed the closePart method to final.
Thank you Claudio
Comment 3 Wayne Beaton CLA 2011-09-20 07:36:40 EDT 
The patch, if applied to the code base, must be flagged iplog+ so that it appears in the log.
Comment 4 Matthias Zimmermann CLA 2011-10-10 12:34:23 EDT 
shipped with scout 3.7.1
Comment 5 Wayne Beaton CLA 2011-10-11 11:04:09 EDT 
Ideally, attachments should be marked iplog+ rather than the bug itself. By so-marking the bug, all comments are regarded as potential IP contributions (this is a limitation of Bugzilla). By marking just the attachment, only the attachment will appear in the IP log.

In this case, I think you really need to unmark the bug and mark the attachment iplog+ instead.