beanvalidation-dev@lists.jboss.org

5 participants
4 discussions

[BVAL-251] Improve Bean Validation support for modularized environments

by Kevin Pollet

Hi experts, IMHO, making Bean Validation ready for the modular world is a great thing! A first step might be to provide the module meta-datas (OSGi headers, …). For OSGi, those meta-datas can be added to the jar Manifest within the maven build with the maven-bundle-plugin (http://felix.apache.org/site/apache-felix-maven-bundle-plugin-bnd.html). The advantage is that the api can be deployed in an OSGi container out of the box. For JBoss Modules the descriptor reside alongside its content but we can provide it. WDYT? --Kevin

11 years, 11 months

7
32
0 / 0

BVAL-238 Dependency injection in ConstraintViolation

by Emmanuel Bernard

Hi team, I've been thinking about BVAL-238 and came up with a first round of ideas and open questions. It is available here http://beanvalidation.org/proposals/BVAL-238/ Please give me your feedback. I think this issue can be closed quite quickly. I've also created a proposals section on the website that will contain such work in progress proposals before inclusion in the spec proper. Check out http://beanvalidation.org/proposals On a side note, for casual website editing, you can use GitHub's `Edit this file` button (see https://github.com/beanvalidation/beanvalidation.org/blob/master/proposal... ). It's not quite a wiki but that's pretty close. One thing you cannot do is create a new file unfortunately. Anyone that have asked for write access should see this button. Emmanuel

12 years, 3 months

5
43
0 / 0

Constructor validation

by Gunnar Morling

Hi experts, Emmanuel asked me to take the lead on the method validation feature, so be prepared for related questions, API proposals and requests for feedback via the mailing list :) The first issue I'd like to discuss is the validation of constructor arguments. Is this something which we want to support at all? I don't think there are that many interception solutions which enable constructor interception at all (for instance CDI interceptors don't, AFAIK). So personally I'd be fine with focussing on actual method validation in BV 1.1, waiting for user demand for constructor validation and adding it possibly in a later release. WDYT? If we decide to include constructor validation, should we support the validation of newly created objects (similar to return value validation), e.g. like that: public class Foo { @Valid public Foo() { } } Here @Valid would trigger a validation of the newly instantiated Foo object (whether to use @Valid or another annotation still needs to be discussed). Any thoughts? --Gunnar

12 years, 4 months

7
27
0 / 0

[Fwd: [javaee-spec users] [jsr342-experts] backwards compatibility requirements]

by Jagadish Prasath Ramu

Hi : Forwarding an email in javaee-spec-users forum on backward compatibility requirements that will be applicable for all specifications. Thanks, -Jagadish

12 years, 5 months

2
1
0 / 0

← Newer
1
Older →

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

beanvalidation-dev November 2011