Bug 135222 - [PerspectiveBar] Add "Open In New Window" context menu to Perspective-Switcher
Summary: [PerspectiveBar] Add "Open In New Window" context menu to Perspective-Switcher
Status: NEW
Alias: None
Product: Platform
Classification: Eclipse Project
Component: UI (show other bugs)
Version: 3.2   Edit
Hardware: PC All
: P3 enhancement (vote)
Target Milestone: ---   Edit
Assignee: Platform UI Triaged CLA
QA Contact:
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords: bugday
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2006-04-06 04:40 EDT by Andy Pahne CLA
Modified: 2014-05-31 10:08 EDT (History)
1 user (show)

See Also:


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Andy Pahne CLA 2006-04-06 04:40:25 EDT
It would be really nice, if I could open another perspective by clicking on a "Open In New Window" context menu item on the perspective icons 

At the moment I need to open the preferences dialogue and adjust the setting on how another perspective is opened. 

I hope, I categorized my feature request correctly (Platform, UI).
Comment 1 Graham McDermott CLA 2014-05-31 09:59:55 EDT
Which perspective icons are you referring to?
1. the ones on the Window->Open Perspective menu?
2. the ones in the "Open Perspective" dialogue?
3. the ones on the Perspective Switcher? (which already have a context menu this could be appended to)

My recommendations:

Forget 1. Having a context menu on a menu item doesn't make sense.

for 2 - the preference could be displayed on the dialogue in some modifiable control - perhaps as two radio buttons. This would allow you to see what the preference is, and then modify it if you wish to. 

3. is easy to achieve - I have code for this that adds a context menu item that will open the selected perspective in a new window. However it only lets you modify the behaviour for perspectives that you already have open. I will commit this change for review.
Comment 2 Graham McDermott CLA 2014-05-31 10:08:08 EDT
I just read the title of the feature request - 3. was what was requested there. However I suggest that 2. would be a better solution to the issue described in the feature description.