Bug 285753 - [Dialogs] move simple org.eclipse.ui.dialogs classes to JFace
Summary: [Dialogs] move simple org.eclipse.ui.dialogs classes to JFace
Status: NEW
Alias: None
Product: Platform
Classification: Eclipse Project
Component: UI (show other bugs)
Version: 3.5   Edit
Hardware: PC Windows Vista
: P5 enhancement (vote)
Target Milestone: ---   Edit
Assignee: Platform UI Triaged CLA
QA Contact:
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2009-08-05 14:36 EDT by Will Horn CLA
Modified: 2019-09-06 16:12 EDT (History)
3 users (show)

See Also:


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Will Horn CLA 2009-08-05 14:36:38 EDT
Build ID: 3.5

org.eclipse.ui.dialogs contains a good number of useful classes that have no need for the workbench.

For example, ElementListSelectionDialog is a common and generic UI feature that shouldn't require a dependency on the workbench.  Looking through it's hierarchy, the only non JFace dependency is org.eclipse.ui.internal.MessageLine, which itself doesn't depend on the workbench either.
Comment 1 Susan McCourt CLA 2009-08-06 11:10:29 EDT
This makes sense conceptually, but I think the chances of it happening are low.  To break so many clients, we'd have to have a pretty solid justification (many use cases of clients that need these dialogs and don't use the workbench, lots of votes, etc.).  I certainly don't see it happening in the 3.6 timeframe, but it might make sense in a major release stream if there was other major/breaking refactoring occurring.

For that reason, I'll leave this open but I think the workaround of copying the dialogs when you don't need the workbench is sufficient for most cases.
Comment 2 Remy Suen CLA 2009-11-06 11:15:14 EST
I wanted to use ListSelectionDialog in e4 but I realized I can't. Should we consider this for 4.0? We don't even have to literally remove them, just @deprecate them and point to the copy/pasted version in JFace?
Comment 3 Eclipse Webmaster CLA 2019-09-06 16:12:06 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.