Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Guard CopyUtil optional services access with workbench running #87

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jul 15, 2022
Merged

Guard CopyUtil optional services access with workbench running #87

merged 1 commit into from
Jul 15, 2022

Conversation

laeubi
Copy link
Member

@laeubi laeubi commented Jun 13, 2022

Currently activateCopy fails if no workbench is running, but all
services are optional, so it seems valid to assume that no workbench
could be handled like no services aviable.

@laeubi laeubi mentioned this pull request Jun 13, 2022
Merged
@laeubi laeubi mentioned this pull request Jun 14, 2022
Open
@laeubi laeubi force-pushed the use_optional_service_inc_copy_utils branch 2 times, most recently from c6e47b0 to e55ccf5 Compare June 15, 2022 03:12
@laeubi laeubi requested review from vogella and akurtakov June 15, 2022 03:26
@laeubi
Guard CopyUtil optional services access with workbench running
64f78d3 
Currently activateCopy fails if no workbench is running, but all
services are optional, so it seems valid to assume that no workbench
could be handled like no services available.
@laeubi laeubi force-pushed the use_optional_service_inc_copy_utils branch from e55ccf5 to 64f78d3 Compare June 15, 2022 03:50
@laeubi
Copy link
Member Author

laeubi commented Jun 15, 2022

I have created

to track upgrading the code-path so we can proceed here, @mickaelistria @vogella @akurtakov so I'd like to merge this now so other changes are not blocked in this area...

@mickaelistria
Copy link
Contributor

so I'd like to merge this now so other changes are not blocked in this area...

I interpret #88 as a blocker. I really strongly dislike seeing if (PlatformUI.isWorkbenchRunning()) in more and more places. It's really bad for the future of the Platform to spread this practice. So I stand with my -1, but this is not to be interpreted as a veto since we're both "simple" committers here.
I leave it to you how to proceed further. I think getting external people to give their opinion as you just did is a good way.

@laeubi
Copy link
Member Author

laeubi commented Jun 20, 2022

@eclipse-equinox/eclipse-equinox-committers anyone?

@laeubi
Copy link
Member Author

laeubi commented Jul 15, 2022

Seems no one of the other committers care enough here to resolve this and #88 is tracking the concerns of Mickael and we do not make it worse than current state I'll merge this for now.

@laeubi laeubi dismissed mickaelistria’s stale review July 15, 2022 07:23

Concerns are tracked at #88

@laeubi laeubi merged commit 098e7c0 into eclipse-equinox:master Jul 15, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@mickaelistria mickaelistria mickaelistria left review comments

@vogella vogella Awaiting requested review from vogella

@akurtakov akurtakov Awaiting requested review from akurtakov

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet
3 participants
@laeubi @mickaelistria @vogella