Bug 534491 - GVT48: "java" is not externalized in Eclipse Application configuration creation panel -> Main tab
Summary: GVT48: "java" is not externalized in Eclipse Application configuration creati...
Status: VERIFIED INVALID
Alias: None
Product: PDE
Classification: Eclipse Project
Component: UI (show other bugs)
Version: 4.8   Edit
Hardware: PC Windows 7
: P3 normal (vote)
Target Milestone: 4.8 RC1   Edit
Assignee: Vikas Chandra CLA
QA Contact:
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2018-05-09 04:59 EDT by You You CLA
Modified: 2018-05-14 21:43 EDT (History)
5 users (show)

See Also:

Attachments
Screen shot (180.77 KB, image/jpeg)
2018-05-09 04:59 EDT, You You CLA 		no flags Details
Current documentation (57.37 KB, image/jpeg)
2018-05-11 08:35 EDT, Vikas Chandra 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 You You CLA 2018-05-09 04:59:22 EDT 
Created attachment 273973 [details]
Screen shot

Build ID: I20180409-2000

Steps to reproduce:
1. Open cmd
2. Run: eclipse.exe -nl en_ZZ
3. Open Run Configuration of a certain project
4. Double-click Eclipse Application to create a new configuration
5. Verify Java executable options

Problem Description:
The second option "java" is not mocked.
Comment 1 Sarika Sinha CLA 2018-05-09 06:09:13 EDT 
@Dani,
Should we translate "java" also ?

This has been there since starting.
Comment 2 Dani Megert CLA 2018-05-09 10:32:52 EDT 
What exactly does 'default' mean? I see it uses 'javaw' instead of 'java'. So, maybe we can just replace 'default' with 'javaw'?

For sure 'java' must not be externalized.
Comment 3 Dani Megert CLA 2018-05-09 10:35:40 EDT 
I think this is PDE not Debug.
Comment 4 Sarika Sinha CLA 2018-05-10 00:28:45 EDT 
Moving to PDE.
It is handled in org.eclipse.pde.internal.ui.launcher.JREBlock
And the name of the button is also fJavawButton.
Comment 5 Dani Megert CLA 2018-05-10 04:26:23 EDT 
Vikas, please see comment 2.
Comment 6 Vikas Chandra CLA 2018-05-11 01:36:55 EDT 
>>Vikas, please see comment 2.

default sets IJavaLaunchConfigurationConstants.ATTR_JAVA_COMMAND attribute to javaw.
Comment 7 Vikas Chandra CLA 2018-05-11 01:41:04 EDT 
>>default sets IJavaLaunchConfigurationConstants.ATTR_JAVA_COMMAND attribute to >>javaw.

Oops..some correction,

First it gets this via
	String javaCommand = config.getAttribute(IJavaLaunchConfigurationConstants.ATTR_JAVA_COMMAND, "javaw");

If there is not value set in the config ( earlier), it defaults to "javaw".
Comment 8 Sarika Sinha CLA 2018-05-11 01:52:52 EDT 
A different Java runtime environment and development kit can provide the value for ATTR_JAVA_COMMAND using org.eclipse.jdt.debug.ui.vmInstallTypePage.

If not provided, it defaults to javaw.
Comment 9 Vikas Chandra CLA 2018-05-11 01:56:57 EDT 
I suggest to add a tooltip to this radiobutton

From the context of "Java Executable" as the label before this, it means default Java Executable. ( which is the correct thing). So I recommend not changing this text.

However for clarity we must add a tooltip on default - saying default Java Executable ( If not provided, it defaults to javaw). For completeness, we can add Java Executable in the tooltip of "java" radio-button.
Comment 10 Dani Megert CLA 2018-05-11 06:25:13 EDT 
(In reply to Vikas Chandra from comment #9)
> I suggest to add a tooltip to this radiobutton
> 
> From the context of "Java Executable" as the label before this, it means
> default Java Executable. ( which is the correct thing). So I recommend not
> changing this text.
> 
> However for clarity we must add a tooltip on default - saying default Java
> Executable ( If not provided, it defaults to javaw). For completeness, we
> can add Java Executable in the tooltip of "java" radio-button.

Tooltips on dialog elements are discouraged and must not be used in general. What should be done is to explain this in the F1 help and then close this bug as INVALID.
Comment 11 Vikas Chandra CLA 2018-05-11 08:35:08 EDT 
Created attachment 273999 [details]
Current documentation

Isn't the current documentation enough ?
Comment 12 Dani Megert CLA 2018-05-11 08:58:29 EDT 
(In reply to Vikas Chandra from comment #11)
> Created attachment 273999 [details]
> Current documentation
> 
> Isn't the current documentation enough ?

No. Please proceed as discussed in the chat.
Comment 13 Vikas Chandra CLA 2018-05-11 09:06:32 EDT 
Opened Bug 534579