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.

Bug 158390 - misspeled ruby samples category name
Summary: misspeled ruby samples category name
Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 158522
Alias: None
Product: ruby
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Code (show other bugs)
Version: 6.x
Hardware: All All
: P3 blocker (vote)
Assignee: Erno Mononen
URL:
Keywords: ERGONOMICS
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2009-02-11 13:04 UTC by Lukas Jungmann
Modified: 2009-03-11 16:05 UTC (History)
1 user (show)

See Also:
Issue Type: DEFECT
Exception Reporter:

Attachments
Are you talking about this? (25.21 KB, image/png)
2009-03-11 16:04 UTC, Jaroslav Tulach 		Details
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 Lukas Jungmann 2009-02-11 13:04:51 UTC 
-start IDE with fresh userdir
-enable ruby if needed
-open new prj wizard -> samples

=> ruby category is called "RubyOpenIDE-Moduleblablabla..."
Comment 1 Erno Mononen 2009-02-11 13:47:06 UTC 
Hmm, I don't know how to reproduce.. which build do I need to get into a state where I have to enable Ruby (I use basic 
+ ruby clusters, and ruby is always enabled for me, also with a clean userdir)? Even if I deactivate the ruby modules 
and then activate them again, the category name is correctly just "Ruby" for me.
Comment 2 Lukas Jungmann 2009-02-11 13:51:06 UTC 
use a distro where ruby is not on by default, should be enough to use java one (see issue 158387).

Also note that after enabling ruby & restarting the IDE(?), issue disappears
Comment 3 Petr Jiricka 2009-02-18 16:44:27 UTC 
Sounds like a duplicate of issue 158522, which was just fixed.
Comment 4 Jaroslav Tulach 2009-03-11 16:04:10 UTC 
Created attachment 78057 [details]
Are you talking about this?
Comment 5 Jaroslav Tulach 2009-03-11 16:05:28 UTC 
I do not understand the description of the problem, but as the attached PNG shows, things look reasonable to me.

*** This issue has been marked as a duplicate of 158522 ***