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 81345 - Need to handle Nodes returned from InstantiatingIterator.instantiate()
Summary: Need to handle Nodes returned from InstantiatingIterator.instantiate()
Status: RESOLVED INVALID
Alias: None
Product: platform
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Dialogs&Wizards (show other bugs)
Version: 5.x
Hardware: All Windows XP
: P3 blocker (vote)
Assignee: Stanislav Aubrecht
URL:
Keywords: API
Depends on:
Blocks: 54780
  Show dependency tree
 
Reported: 2006-07-28 14:42 UTC by Petr Jiricka
Modified: 2012-09-27 10:50 UTC (History)
1 user (show)

See Also:
Issue Type: TASK
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 Petr Jiricka 2006-07-28 14:42:29 UTC 
It should be possible to return Nodes from InstantiatingIterator.instantiate(),
and these Nodes should be handled by the wizard framework.
This is needed, so that objects created through the wizard, that are represented
by a non-file Node, can be opened in the explorer - see issue 54780.

I am filing this as a P3 DEFECT, because it is required to solve another P3 DEFECT.
Comment 1 Jiri Rechtacek 2006-08-10 08:18:31 UTC 
Needs to define a contract between wizard's iterator and project infrastructure,
I'm able to adapt wizard's infrastructure to this contract, e.g. modify
TemplateWizard. Please, consider if the fixes issue 54534 and issue 45340. 
To Web team: try optionally draft out an contract, make sure that nodes which
will return from your iterator, are included in existing node's hierarchy to
allow to select them. Thanks
Comment 2 Jiri Rechtacek 2006-11-22 16:54:38 UTC 
Change back to task. Web team, please consider severity this problem and if it's
relevant to NB6.0 then assign appropriate priority and will be tracked in NB6.0
planning. Draft of contract new API is appreciated. Thanks
Comment 3 Jiri Rechtacek 2008-10-16 15:17:26 UTC 
It is still valid RFE? Thanks
Comment 4 Stanislav Aubrecht 2012-09-27 10:50:59 UTC 
Please reopen if still valid, thanks.