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 42865

Summary: Project types need spec of supported templates
Product: projects Reporter: Adam Sotona <asotona>
Component: Generic Projects UIAssignee: jrojcek <jrojcek>
Severity: blocker CC: jrojcek
Priority: P2    
Version: 4.x   
Hardware: All   
OS: All   
Issue Type: TASK Exception Reporter:
Bug Depends on:    
Bug Blocks: 41535, 42864    

Description Adam Sotona 2004-05-05 17:48:51 UTC
allows to specify recomended templates for J2ME
project type but the granularity and coverage is

Standard templates like .properties .txt .xml does
not have any type defined.

Java package is covered in templateType_Java but
together with Applet, Java Class, Empty Java File,
Java Exception, Java Interface, JApplet, and Java
Main Class.

We need to be able to define more exactly our
primary / supported / unwanted templates.
Comment 1 Jesse Glick 2004-05-05 18:49:25 UTC
Agreed that Applet, JApplet, and MainClass should not covered by the
same template type as they are J2SE-specific.

Will need to review all templates and template categories in some kind
of spreadsheet or something to make sure that they can realistically
provide the necessary control for J2SE projects, web app projects, and
J2ME projects (at least).
Comment 2 Petr Hrebejk 2004-05-06 10:01:20 UTC
Temlates in layers are supposed to have more than one templateType
attribute. Serve yourselv with granularity. If you need specilal
treatment for e.g. package just an attr to it. It may even special
type per template.

Comment 3 Petr Hrebejk 2004-05-06 11:43:53 UTC
OK That was maybe too much :-) It is possible to do fine grained
selection of templates. However we need specs for all our project
types (J2SE, J2ME, Web, NetBeans) make a matrix from them and assing
the proper types to templates.
Comment 4 Petr Hrebejk 2004-05-06 11:45:45 UTC
Now it is probably up to UI team to do the specs.
Comment 5 jrojcek 2004-06-17 13:38:49 UTC
I guess this has been fixed.