Bug 210557 - [Preferences] [PreferencePage] Preference Dialog should support IMessageManager
Summary: [Preferences] [PreferencePage] Preference Dialog should support IMessageManager
Status: NEW
Alias: None
Product: Platform
Classification: Eclipse Project
Component: UI (show other bugs)
Version: 3.4   Edit
Hardware: All All
: P5 enhancement (vote)
Target Milestone: ---   Edit
Assignee: Platform UI Triaged CLA
QA Contact:
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords: helpwanted
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2007-11-21 12:47 EST by Philipp Kursawe CLA
Modified: 2019-09-06 16:13 EDT (History)
1 user (show)

See Also:

Attachments
Form in preference page with validation (13.15 KB, image/png)
2007-11-21 12:47 EST, Philipp Kursawe CLA 		no flags Details
View All Add an attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.)

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Philipp Kursawe CLA 2007-11-21 12:47:11 EST 
Created attachment 83452 [details]
Form in preference page with validation

I am using a heavily modified FieldEditorPreferencePage implementation that can generate field editors from Annotations of a given Input Object. 
Inside each page I create a form control to use the IManagedForm's IMessageManager to display preference page validation informations and an icon.
However it would be better if the preference page container would already contain a IManagedForm or at least provide IMessageManager support.

Is something like redesigning the Preferences Dialog planned in the near future?

I have attached a screenshot of how this is looking right now.
Comment 1 Remy Suen CLA 2007-11-21 14:12:13 EST 
+1, I think this is a great idea.
Comment 2 Tod Creasey CLA 2007-11-21 14:29:13 EST 
There are currently no plans to look at the preferences dialog
Comment 3 Susan McCourt CLA 2009-07-09 19:29:33 EDT 
As per http://wiki.eclipse.org/Platform_UI/Bug_Triage_Change_2009
Comment 4 Eclipse Webmaster CLA 2019-09-06 16:13:14 EDT 
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.

If you have further information on the current state of the bug, please add it. 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.