I figured it out. It was this: > .expressionLanguageSupported(ExpressionLanguageScope.VARIABLE_REGISTRY)
It appears that that tricks the UI into flipping from a drop down to a text box. Is this "expected" or should it be considered a bug? On Sat, Jul 7, 2018 at 11:16 AM Mike Thomsen <[email protected]> wrote: > I have the following configuration property in a new processor, PutGridFS: > > static final AllowableValue NO_UNIQUE = new AllowableValue("none", > "None", "No uniqueness will be enforced."); > static final AllowableValue UNIQUE_NAME = new AllowableValue("name", > "Name", "Only the filename must " + > "be unique."); > static final AllowableValue UNIQUE_HASH = new AllowableValue("hash", > "Hash", "Only the file hash must be " + > "unique."); > static final AllowableValue UNIQUE_BOTH = new AllowableValue("both", > "Both", "Both the filename and hash " + > "must be unique."); > > static final PropertyDescriptor ENFORCE_UNIQUENESS = new > PropertyDescriptor.Builder() > .name("putgridfs-enforce-uniqueness") > .displayName("Enforce Uniqueness") > .description("When enabled, this option will ensure that > uniqueness is enforced on the bucket. It will do so by creating a MongoDB > index " + > "that matches your selection. It should ideally be > configured once when the bucket is created for the first time because " + > "it could take a long time to build on an existing bucket > wit a lot of data.") > .allowableValues(NO_UNIQUE, UNIQUE_BOTH, UNIQUE_NAME, UNIQUE_HASH) > .defaultValue(NO_UNIQUE.getValue()) > > .expressionLanguageSupported(ExpressionLanguageScope.VARIABLE_REGISTRY) > .required(true) > .addValidator(Validator.VALID) > .build(); > > > When I load the configuration dialog, it shows "None" in the Enforce > Uniqueness property. When I click to change it opens a free text dialog > with "none" as the entry instead of giving me a drop down. > > Any ideas of what is going on here? It looks like a UI bug to me. I've > compared the descriptor to ones that still behave fine and cannot find any > differences. > > Thanks, > > Mike > >
