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.
When opening the CASA editor the display may not reflect the current state of the projects the composite application contains - without any indications to the user. It may require a (re)build before the display is refershed and up to date. The user has to know that they have to do this explicit step, it is not intuitive. This is not acceptable for a production release. If an editor needs other projects to be built to show anything useful or the latest it should either provide some indication/guidance as to that a build might be required - or automatically do the builds so it can display the latest state. The ideal solution would be that CASA does not require the other projects to be built (does not use a binary interface but is aware of the endpoints directly without build), but even with the current limitations of a binary interface we must improve this experience.
*** Issue 124221 has been marked as a duplicate of this issue. ***
Fixed to keep CASA up to date with the SU projects. Explicit project build is still required. Visual indication ("?" in the SU widget title) indicates that the project needs a rebuild.
Assigned to Sunil B for verification
"?" appears only when a new SU is added to the Composite App. Any change to the SU (Say If I add one more port/bpel process to the existing Bpel module) is not reflected, unless the Composite App project is rebuilt. Is this the expected behavior?
Yes, that's the expected behavior.
I confirmed with Jun that as Deepak had questioned, this is indeed working as designed. e.g. when i first drag a bpel project into the casa canvass "JBI Modules" section, it has a "?" on the project icon, no links are shown. After i build the Comp App, the ? goes away and the links appear. I go back to the BPEL module and modify it (change the bpel code in the bpel editor and 'save'). Presumably the Comp App may now be considered 'stale' ie it does not match the current bpel project code until it is rebuilt. This state change is still not indicated in the CASA editor. It appears to me that part of the stated requirement was fulfilled but maybe not everything, so I'm marking this issue as verified (because it works correctly as designed and coded) but I'm also assigning to the originator because he should evaluate whether this change is enough to satisfy his requirement. If not i suggest that he should negotiate with Jun & open a new issue or reopen this one if not satisfied. OK, it's not clear how to reassign the issue so I'll add aegloff to the cc list he will probably get two emails about this, it's up to him to take any action if he does not like this solution. Note we got no response the deepak's question on whether the fix satisfied him or not.
The original problem has not been addressed, that is: a user should either receive a clear indication that their current CASA view needs updating, or it needs to update it automatically. Otherwise users get easily confused about the inconsistent views, it is NOT obvious to everyone that a re-build is required every time someone goes back to the CASA view to ensure a consistent view. I understand that with the current implementation it is challenging to detect this, so maybe we should look into what it would in terms of enhancements in the project for CASA to be able to detect this. That it works as designed never justifies usability issues like this. If the design does not meet the expectations of our users it is a bug, whether the deficiency lies in the gathered requirements, design or implementation it doesn't matter. Please do not close this issue unless it has been resolved. If you want to lower the priority please negotiate with PM.
additional note from andi: BTW I don't think this issue should hold up the GlassFish ESB release, so I"m ok with whatever is needed to do to move this out to a subsequent release, e.g. lowering priority temporarily. Andi So now I'm lowering to p3 because we are after code freeze and I'm not too sure dev can fix this immediately. We need to make sure not to break anything else and take the time to do this right if we make further changes. Dev, please discuss with Andi if you need help to understand his requirement or if there are reasons it's very hard to do exactly what he wants.