[wildfly-dev] Bringing Bean Validation 2.0 to WildFly

[Gunnar Morling]

I was wondering the same thing; just from looking at it from the outside,
being after Alpha1 seems like the right time to do this kind of update.

Also is there any public schedule available for WF 11 and 12? It'd be sad
if we could get BV 2 into WF only in a year or so (wildly guessing here
when to expect WF 12), while e.g. Spring 5 with BV 2 support is planned to
be released this summer.

--Gunnar



2017-07-14 18:38 GMT+03:00 Tristan Tarrant <ttarrant at redhat.com>:

> +1.
>
> Where are the Alphas (aside from Alpha1), the Betas, the CRs for WildFly
> 11 ?
>
> Tristan
>
> On 7/13/17 7:06 PM, Emmanuel Bernard wrote:
> > Barring other constraints, I would think we would want to move forward
> > to the latest in the next WF major. What’s the point of holding up
> > technology? Likewise there is very little value in keeping the old one
> > in in parallel. More knobs and more pain in the subsystems.
> >
> >> On 13 Jul 2017, at 10:50, Gunnar Morling <gunnar at hibernate.org
> >> <mailto:gunnar at hibernate.org>> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> <TL,DR>Should we update WildFly to BV 2.0 and Hibernate Validator 6.0,
> >> or should new modules be added for those, letting the user to choose
> >> the version to enable?</TL,DR>
> >>
> >> The Bean Validation 2.0 spec (JSR 380) is almost done [1], so I'd like
> >> to discuss how BV 2 and its reference implementation HV 6 can be
> >> integrated into WildFly. BV 2 will be part of Java EE 8.
> >>
> >> I can think of two approaches:
> >>
> >> 1) Just updating the existing WildFly modules for BV API and HV to the
> >> new versions
> >> 2) Leave the existing modules for BV 1.1 (+ implementation) and add
> >> separate modules for BV 2.0
> >>
> >> 1) would be easier and less effort. But I'm not sure how feasible it
> >> is, in case that WF should remain Java EE 7 compatible for the time
> >> being. Also, while BV 2 is fully backwards compatible at the
> >> spec-level, Hibernate Validator amends the spec API with some extended
> >> functionality. In that extended HV-specific API some changes were
> >> required, mostly as previous experimental features were replaced by
> >> equivalent standardized functionality in the BV API.
> >>
> >> 2) would let the user chose between BV 1.1 and 2.0, but it'd entail
> >> some more work:
> >>
> >> * A place for that configuration is required. I think it could be done
> >> similarly to JPA, i.e. via a property with the module name in
> >> META-INF/validation.xml
> >> * Depending on that configuration, the right set of modules needs to
> >> be enabled. Several modules currently have a fixed dependency to the
> >> "org.hibernate.validator:main" module (e.g. JPA, Weld, JCA, RestEasy)
> >> which would have be made more dynamic, based on the version chosen by
> >> the user.
> >>
> >> What does everyone think on this? And what could be a suitable WildFly
> >> target version for such change? Could we aim at incorporating BV 2.0
> >> into WF 11?
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >>
> >> --Gunnar
> >>
> >> [1]
> >> http://beanvalidation.org/news/2017/07/12/bean-
> validation-2-0-cr3-submitted-to-final-approval-ballot/
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> wildfly-dev mailing list
> >> wildfly-dev at lists.jboss.org <mailto:wildfly-dev at lists.jboss.org>
> >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/wildfly-dev
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > wildfly-dev mailing list
> > wildfly-dev at lists.jboss.org
> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/wildfly-dev
> >
>
> --
> Tristan Tarrant
> Infinispan Lead
> JBoss, a division of Red Hat
> _______________________________________________
> wildfly-dev mailing list
> wildfly-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/wildfly-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/wildfly-dev/attachments/20170716/65261860/attachment.html