Re: request for comment: related view

From: Harald Niesche (haral..heco.de)
Date: Sun Sep 14 2003 - 16:01:39 EDT

  • Next message: Chuck Hill: "Re: request for comment: related view"

    Ulrich Köster wrote:
    >> We have a tabbed editor here, but I am unsure what state it is in.
    >
    > Why not donate it to woproject?

    1) the guy that wrote the bulk of it needs to decide that himself (you
    know who you are!)
    2) last time I checked it was in a state where donation could have been
    construed to be a hostile act

    >> I am not trying to start a flame war, but somehow I always had the
    >> feeling that Mac OS doesn't handle those folders-as-files
    >> (bundle-wrapper is the official name?) really well, either (rename one
    >> of them -- does Finder rename the parts inside?). You need to be able
    >> to look inside to make them work (e.g. with CVS and .eomodel~
    >> folders), but it's really quite hard to do that on Mac OS X.
    >
    > In the filesystem a bundle is nothing else then a folder. So for cvs it
    > does not make a difference. Same for Eclipse.

    Yes, but that can also cause problems (remember the ~ folders that are
    copies containing their own CVS folder?). The part that I criticize is
    that on the surface they look like files but are not and some operations
    (e.g. renaming the "file") may lead to undesired effects if done in the
    wrong place (why is renaming it different when done in a shell script
    vs. when done in Finder -- I know why, but I think it's ugly). They
    could have at least decoupled the names inside from the name of the
    folder, that would have avoided the first half of the problems I see.

    >> Besides, there are some folders that are quite special to Eclipse, I
    >> am - of course - talking about Java packages and CVS Folders. I think
    >> it should be possible to make Eclipse recognize bundle wrappers as
    >> such (although I'd rather like if I could look inside without having
    >> to Alt-doubleclick things).

    No, I meant it should be possible to attach new default options to
    folders which match certain filename patterns (I didn't check though).
    And if it is possible, we should think carefully to make sure it is
    still easy to look inside.

    > The related view does the 'same' thing. ...
    > This is just the beginning. ...

    Yes, and I like the idea!

    Harald



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Sun Sep 14 2003 - 15:57:16 EDT