Bug 535510

Summary:	file patterns for content-types not prioritized
Product:	[Eclipse Project] Platform	Reporter:	Martin Lippert <mlippert>
Component:	Resources	Assignee:	Platform-Resources-Inbox <platform-resources-inbox>
Status:	REOPENED ---	QA Contact:
Severity:	normal
Priority:	P3	CC:	gunnar, mistria
Version:	4.8
Target Milestone:	---
Hardware:	All
OS:	All
Whiteboard:	stalebug

Description Martin Lippert

2018-06-04 05:44:42 EDT

This is a follow-up entry from Bug #263316.

I defined a content-type via file-patterns, but it doesn't seem to be taken into account in the correct way. The extension looks like:

   <extension
         point="org.eclipse.core.contenttype.contentTypes">
      <content-type
            id="org.springframework.boot.ide.properties.application.properties"
            base-type="org.eclipse.jdt.core.javaProperties"
            name="Spring Properties File"
            priority="high">
      </content-type>
      <file-association
            content-type="org.springframework.boot.ide.properties.application.properties"
            file-patterns="*application*.properties">
      </file-association>
   </extension>

There is also an associated editor defined for that content-type. But having a file called "application.properties" the editor doesn't show up for this.

When I change the definition to

            file-names="application.properties">

Everything works as expected.
Looks like a bug to be, the file pattern based content-type definition should work as well.

Comment 1 Mickael Istria

2018-06-04 05:50:49 EDT

What do you mean by work? Just opening the right editor, or did you also checked the behavior of some API?

Can you please add a test to IContentTypeManagerTest about it, mimicking what was done in https://git.eclipse.org/c/platform/eclipse.platform.resources.git/commit/?id=28cac80c5be28e7e7ba0f45222e89c94a53fb902 but with your specific case?
This will help to establish which layer is wrong: if ContentTypeManager behaves well, then it is most likely an issue in how the UI uses the API to take some decision about what to show.

Comment 2 Martin Lippert

2018-06-15 05:06:29 EDT

Mickael and I debugged this at EclipseCon France a bit and we thing the culprit is:

ContentTypeCatalog.internalFindContentTypesFor(..) prioritizes an extension-based content-type definition over a pattern-based definition. It looks like whenever there is a content-type associated via a file extension like ".properties", an additional pattern-based definition like "*application*.properties" isn't prioritized over the extension-based one.

We think it would make sense to change this and take this specific case into account:

===
Whenever there is a file-patterns definition that includes the file-extension (like in the example above), prioritize the file-pattern-based one, since it is more specific.
===

Comment 3 Eclipse Genie

2021-03-06 15:04:05 EST

This bug hasn't had any activity in quite some time. Maybe the problem got resolved, was a duplicate of something else, or became less pressing for some reason - or maybe it's still relevant but just hasn't been looked at yet. As such, we're closing this bug.

If you have further information on the current state of the bug, please add it and reopen this bug. The information can be, for example, that the problem still occurs, that you still want the feature, that more information is needed, or that the bug is (for whatever reason) no longer relevant.

--
The automated Eclipse Genie.

Comment 4 Mickael Istria

2021-03-06 15:20:14 EST

This is still relevant.