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 56493 - [41cat] Customizable # of flat levels when "Package View Type" is "Tree View"
Summary: [41cat] Customizable # of flat levels when "Package View Type" is "Tree View"
Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 53192
Alias: None
Product: projects
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Generic Infrastructure (show other bugs)
Version: 4.x
Hardware: PC Windows XP
: P3 blocker (vote)
Assignee: Jesse Glick
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2005-03-15 19:55 UTC by gugrim
Modified: 2005-03-18 00:28 UTC (History)
0 users

See Also:
Issue Type: ENHANCEMENT
Exception Reporter:


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description gugrim 2005-03-15 19:55:36 UTC
[ BUILD # : 200503061900 ]
[ JDK VERSION : 1.5.0_01 ]

The option to use a tree in the package view is nice but since almost all my projects have a package structure where the first three levels are the same, e g "se.grim.doi" or "se.grim.effie", I always have to expand a few levels to get to something interesting. What if the "Package View Type" option was changed to some thing like "Package View Flat Levels". Leaving it empty could mean infinite and give the same result as the current "Package View" setting. A value of three would give the following result after expanding the Source node:

Source
+ META-INF
+ se.grim.doi

Expanding the doi node gives:

Source
+ META-INF
+ se.grim.doi
  + controller
  + model
  + view

After expanding the model package I would get

Source
+ META-INF
+ se.grim.doi
  + controller
  + model
  | + ejb
  | + naming
  | DoiBroker.java
  + view

A setting like this is naturally best to have on the project level since I could then change the flat count to four for the doi project when I don't intend to add more packages directly below the doi level.
Comment 1 Jesse Glick 2005-03-18 00:28:28 UTC

*** This issue has been marked as a duplicate of 53192 ***