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.
-------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: bpel 2.0 editor- mapper issues Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2008 10:58:03 -0800 From: Murali Pottlapelli <Murali.Pottlapelli@Sun.COM> Organization: Sun Microsystems Inc. To: Nikita Krjukov <Nikita.Krjukov@Sun.COM> CC: Vladimir Yaroslavskiy <Vladimir.Yaroslavskiy@Sun.COM> Hi Nikita/Vladmir, Yes, please change type inconsistency errors to warnings. Are you saying if I get the latest version of the NB and validate BP with invalid mapping (type inconsistency) I would get errors? If yes, please change them to warnings quickly. Regards Murali Nikita Krjukov wrote: > Murali > > Murali Pottlapelli wrote: >> Alexy sent an email stating he fixed the issues reported by Tuhin and >> he will be checking in soon. >> >> Nikita, Please find my comment in-line. >> >> Regards >> Murali >> >> Vladimir Yaroslavskiy wrote: >>> please provide test project. >>> >>> Nikita Krjukov wrote: >>>> Hi Murali. >>>> >>>> Murali Pottlapelli wrote: >>>>> Hi Nikita, >>>>> Thanks for updating prefixes. >>>>> >>>>> Will you please explain why you think referenced assignment is >>>>> valid? Is it possible to convert long to dateTime? >>>>> >>>>> Anyway when validation fails, my preference is to warn the user >>>>> visually and let the user proceed with it. When the project is >>>>> build or business process is validated show the invalid mappings >>>>> as warnings. We neither should error nor do pop-ups when the user >>>>> does invalid mapping. >>>> I don't think it is valid. I agree with you. It has to be warning. :-) >>>> I add Vladimir Yaroslavsky to list of recipients. >> Are you implementing/fixing bugs to show warning on mapping of nodes >> that are not same type. > Actually it is not me, who implemented it. It is Vladimir Y. I asked > him today and he said that he did it. > That is why I added him and he then asked a project where the problem > can be reproduced. . > > Sorry, it seems I didn't understand the main problem. I just have > tried and found that the validation is successfully catching type > inconsistency. > But the only difference is that it is ERROR instead of WARNING. Do you > want we change this only? > > Nikita
fixed.