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 58058 - Thinks package folder already used, even though it was removed from other project
Summary: Thinks package folder already used, even though it was removed from other pro...
Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 51810
Alias: None
Product: projects
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Generic Infrastructure (show other bugs)
Version: 4.x
Hardware: PC Windows XP
: P4 blocker (vote)
Assignee: Milos Kleint
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on: 51810
Blocks:
  Show dependency tree
 
Reported: 2005-04-19 19:07 UTC by dkarr
Modified: 2008-11-19 12:32 UTC (History)
0 users

See Also:
Issue Type: DEFECT
Exception Reporter:

Attachments
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 dkarr 2005-04-19 19:07:21 UTC 
I started with a project that really encompassed two integrated applications.  I
created a new project, and I tried to add a source folder that was in the
original project, which is when I discovered the somewhat annoying fact that a
source folder can only be owned by one project.  That's an annoyance for my
particular situation, but that's another issue.

So, I then went to the other project and removed the source folder in question
from the project.  I then tried to create the second project again, and when I
tried to add the source folder again, it STILL said that the original project
still owns that source folder.  I haven't tried to exit NB and restart yet.
Comment 1 Jesse Glick 2005-04-19 19:41:36 UTC 
You may need to exit & restart.
Comment 2 dkarr 2005-04-19 20:02:42 UTC 
I verified that when I exit NB and restart, I can then add the source folder in
question to the second project.
Comment 3 Milos Kleint 2008-11-19 12:32:11 UTC 
most probably a duplicate of #51810. The fact that one source root is bound to one project is inherent to the design,
51810 shall allow better behaviour in these cases though.

*** This issue has been marked as a duplicate of 51810 ***