This Bugzilla instance is a read-only archive of historic NetBeans bug reports. To report a bug in NetBeans please follow the project's instructions for reporting issues.
Summary: | Do not allow duplicate bundle file for wrapper module | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | apisupport | Reporter: | Rochelle Raccah <raccah> |
Component: | Project | Assignee: | rmichalsky <rmichalsky> |
Status: | RESOLVED WONTFIX | ||
Severity: | blocker | CC: | jglick |
Priority: | P4 | ||
Version: | 5.x | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | All | ||
Issue Type: | DEFECT | Exception Reporter: |
Description
Rochelle Raccah
2005-10-03 22:09:59 UTC
The wizards are there to generate code quickly, help people get going. IMHO these cannot and should not handle all real life setups that can possibly happen. Given that the chance of this usecase to happen is rather small in my opinion, I suggest lowering the priority to P4 or P5. Should handle situations which are well-defined, though - if the wizard generates something which is demonstrably not going to work, that's a bug (of some priority). P4 is reasonable given that it is not likely an existing lib will in fact Bundle.properties in that location, since this naming convention is from NB modules, and it is a pretty odd case to have something which looks like a NB module in terms of filenames yet isn't one. What is odd/NB specific about having a jar file which contains code and a Bundle.properties in the same package? The name "Bundle.properties" is a NB-specific convention, not in general use that I know of. It is used in glassfish as well - I don't think it's an NB convention. Used in glassfish by people who used to work on NB modules, perhaps? Maybe - I'll ask. But if NB itself suggests this as a properties file name in j2seprojects, then my point is still valid. Does it? How about in i18n of forms? j2seproject does not do anything special with *.properties files. If the i18n or i18n-form modules specifically suggest "Bundle" as a filename, please file a bug report in the i18n component (since it's not really a great convention to begin with), but I do not believe they do. I'm not working on APISupport anymore. Reassigning to owner of the component, so the issue is not 'forgotten' forever. Not into 7.0 or next release. Feel free to reopen if more important than it seems. NetBeans.org Migration: changing resolution from LATER to WONTFIX Probably still valid, but too low priority to bother with. |