Community
Participate
Working Groups
The implementation uses owner-drawn label-provides to fake hyper-links in any ColumnViewer using the 3.3 Viewer API including adaption of mouse cursor.
Created attachment 147094 [details] Hyper links in tables or trees
(In reply to comment #1) > Created an attachment (id=147094) [details] > Hyper links in tables or trees I need to ask for assistance: Where do I get the snippet number, which is actually always part of the snippet class name? If I get the new number, shall I resend the attachment? [Has anyone else noted, that on creation of new bugzilla entries the version number is always ignored?]
The snippet looks good, thanks! Don't worry about the snippet number, we can do that at the time this is committed to CVS. The next step is to get this through the IP process (it's more than 250 lines of code). Daniel, did you write 100% of this contribution, and does your employer agree that you can contribute this to Eclipse under the EPL?
(In reply to comment #3) > The snippet looks good, thanks! Thanks to you for your encouragement! > Don't worry about the snippet number, we can do > that at the time this is committed to CVS. OK, that's fine for me. > The next step is to get this through the IP process (it's more than 250 lines of code). > > Daniel, did you write 100% of this contribution, and does your employer agree > that you can contribute this to Eclipse under the EPL? 1) It wrote 100% of this stuff on my own. 2) I did also 100% of that in my spare time, so there's no employer involved except myself and I hope I did correctly signal that it's 100% EPL. Wow, that was three times 100% - a new record for me;-)
(In reply to comment #4) > 2) I did also 100% of that in my spare time, so there's no employer involved > except myself and I hope I did correctly signal that it's 100% EPL. Since we don't know what kind of contract you have with your employer (they might own whatever you produce, even in your spare time), we still would like to know if your employer is ok with contributing this to Eclipse. Can you find out about this and respond on the bug, for example with "my employer allows me to contribute" or "my employer agrees that they don't own what I produce in my spare time"? Thanks!
(In reply to comment #5) > (In reply to comment #4) > > 2) I did also 100% of that in my spare time, so there's no employer involved > > except myself and I hope I did correctly signal that it's 100% EPL. > > Since we don't know what kind of contract you have with your employer (they > might own whatever you produce, even in your spare time), we still would like > to know if your employer is ok with contributing this to Eclipse. Can you find > out about this and respond on the bug, for example with "my employer allows me > to contribute" or "my employer agrees that they don't own what I produce in my > spare time"? Sorry, I wasn't aware of such models. But it's for sure and guaranteed that my employer agrees that they don't own what I produce in my spare time.
Hitesh is now responsible for watching bugs in the [Viewers] component area.
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.
