[jbosside-dev] jbosside wtp integration woes ;)

[Marshall Culpepper]

If the only thing you want to inline into a column is the current Server
status, why don't you just include it as part of the label ie....

JBoss 4.0.5.GA [started]
|- Modules

On 11/13/06, Rob Stryker <rob.stryker at jboss.com> wrote:
>
> My point was that before, all they needed was a launch configuration, and
> it was nice and simple for them. Now they need a view, and that's a pain and
> cluttering. Two views would just be overkill.
>
> As for why not just have one tree, I tried that months ago as well,
> however, the fact that I'd like to show whether the server is started or
> stopped in the same way the Servers View does (in columns), it's impossible
> to do properly.
>
> The columns mess up the usefullness of the tree. If I have a viewer with 3
> columns, and only the left most column has children (who also have children
> etc), the moment the children expand past the column's width, they get cut
> off. Thus, the tree becomes useless. In order to see any of the elements,
> you end up having to expand the column's width, which is just silly.
>
> So instead I settled on two viewers one on top of the other, which I
> thought was the best possible answer. I've solicited feedback / suggestions
> before and got minimal input from anyone, so as far as I was concerned, this
> was the best answer possible.
>
> If I just went with one tree, then the current server state would have to
> be a child of the server instead of its own column, which may be acceptable
> but it wasn't what I thought was the most beautiful or intuitive. In this
> way, the user can see a list of his servers and what state they're in first,
> and then get more details about whichever he wants. If server state was
> instead a sub-element in the tree, and hte user had 3 servers declared, then
> he'd have to expand each of the servers to see which were started or
> stopped. Then there'd be all the other stuff between server state (such as
> modules, descriptor xpaths, event log) etc, that it would look horrendous.
>
> Server 1
>  | -  State: Started
>  | -  Modules
>  | -  Event Log
>  | -  Descriptor XPaths
>  | -  blah blah blah
> Server 2
>  | -  State: Stopped
>  | -  Modules
>  | -  blah blah
> Server 3
>  | -  State: Starting
>  | -  et etc etc
>
> Clearly this isn't optimal to quickly see which servers are started or
> stopped.
>
> And finally, my server view extension API was written to accept a changing
> input for the second viewer. It was not written to be a child of several
> different elements, but rather to be stand-alone elements with a changing
> input.
>
> Hopefully this gives you some insight into what was going through my tiny
> programmer mind.
>
> - Rob
>
> On 11/13/06, Max Rydahl Andersen < max.andersen at jboss.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, 13 Nov 2006 19:09:40 +0100, Rob Stryker < rob.stryker at jboss.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Because I was told much earlier that two views is crap, one is ideal.
> > > Users
> > > dont want tons of views opened to do somethign that was previously
> > > controlled by a launch configuration.
> >
> > the two views argument i understand...so why not just have one tree ?
> >
> > I don't understand your launch configuration point is for ? We still
> > have that...
> >
> > /max
> >
> > >
> > > On 11/13/06, Max Rydahl Andersen <max.andersen at jboss.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> >> #1
> > >> >> Eclipse WTP has this notion of "Adding an applicaiton" to a
> > server.
> > >> Does
> > >> >> this also automatically
> > >> >> add source lookup to that server ?
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > AFAIK no.. but this is something that might be possible to code in
> > >> > ourselves
> > >> > for our adapter (Rob would know for sure)
> > >>
> > >> If not, how do they handle the "disable breakpoints" on server
> > feature
> > >> if
> > >> they don't somehow get info about the source ?
> > >> (look in the wtp server preferences)
> > >>
> > >> > #2
> > >> >> We have this splitted jbosserver view with what looks to me a
> > >> filtered
> > >> >> WTP
> > >> >> server view and specific jboss bottm part, correct ?
> > >> >> Why is there both a mix of jboss inc servers and jboss wtp servers
> > >> >> visible
> > >> >> in that one ?
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > Well IMO this should be JBoss servers only as it is the "JBoss
> > Server
> > >> > View"
> > >> > ..
> > >>
> > >> Why not just reuse the existing WTP view and have the jboss specific
> > >> things in another view ?
> > >> (just curious)
> > >>
> > >> --
> > >> --
> > >> Max Rydahl Andersen
> > >> callto://max.rydahl.andersen
> > >>
> > >> Hibernate
> > >> max at hibernate.org
> > >> http://hibernate.org
> > >>
> > >> JBoss a division of Red Hat
> > >> max.andersen at jboss.com
> > >> _______________________________________________
> > >> jbosside-dev mailing list
> > >> jbosside-dev at lists.jboss.org
> > >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbosside-dev
> > >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > --
> > Max Rydahl Andersen
> > callto://max.rydahl.andersen
> >
> > Hibernate
> > max at hibernate.org
> > http://hibernate.org
> >
> > JBoss a division of Red Hat
> > max.andersen at jboss.com
> >
>
>


-- 
Marshall Culpepper
marshall.culpepper at jboss.com
JBossIDE Team Lead
JBoss, a division of Red Hat
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/jbosstools-dev/attachments/20061113/97d20ea0/attachment.html