Community
Participate
Working Groups
Currently in v3, you are able to associate capabilities with editors, so that when the capability is not enabled, the editors are hidden. This could be confusing to users if the default editor for a certain type of file is currently filtered out by a capability. I believe the system editor will open in that case. Here are several issues/options (in order of preference): #A Allow capabilities to define default editors for the capability. For example, you could have: Web developer - might edit java files on occasion, so use java editor as default editor for .java files UI Java developer - more experienced java editor that deals with GUI, so use visual editor as default editor for .java files #B It would be nice if when the user tries to open a file, they get a dialog that informs them that some of the editors that can edit this file (or maybe just the default editor if that's easier) are currently filtered out by a capability, would the user like to enable the capability. #C If the default editor is currently filtered out, use another associated editor instead of the system editor. For example, if both the Java Editor & Text Editor can open .java files and Java Editor is the default editor, but it's currently filtered out, Text editor should open instead.
What exactly is preventing to have a trigger point for enabling activities on opening of the editor? Often a user wants to open an editor, but is not aware that activity is disabled and where to enable it.
Before I close or keep this bug I wonder why we're in this state to begin with. We're saying the user can't open a given file with its default editor but how did the user create this file without invoking the bound activity to begin with? This should've been covered by the new and import wizards. Why is this not sufficient?
*** Bug 105141 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
I wasn't aware we could trigger capabilities on general file import. That would probably satisfy the original intentions of this bug. But I still think it'd be a nice enhancement if we could associate capabilities with default editors like I mentioned in option A in comment #0 for the reason mentioned in the same comment. I'll go ahead and change the sev of this bug to enhancement.
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.
