3:13 p.m.
Hi,
In addition to the things to be added with BV 1.1, I think we should
also have a look at BV-related sections which are part of the Java EE
spec as of today.
More specifically, the Java EE spec says in section EE.6.27 on the
integration of BV and JSF/JPA:
"The Java EE platform requires that web containers make an instance of
ValidatorFactory available to JSF implementations by storing it in a
servlet context attribute named
javax.faces.validator.beanValidator.ValidatorFactory.
The Java EE platform also requires that an instance of
ValidatorFactory be made available to JPA providers as a property in
the map that is passed as the second argument to the
createContainerEntityManagerFactory(PersistenceUnitInfo, Map) method
of the PersistenceProvider interface, under the name
javax.persistence.validation.factory."
If we're going to describe the integration of BV and CDI within the BV
spec, I guess it would make sense that this section goes there as well
to be consistent. WDYT?
--Gunnar
2012/8/22 Emmanuel Bernard <emmanuel(a)hibernate.org>:
I'm sure there will be a next call soon, bring me in and we can
discuss the issue at large :)
On 22 août 2012, at 14:37, Pete Muir wrote:
> Can you sync with Linda or Bill direct, as it really was just mutterings as you
weren't on the call ;-)
>
> On 22 Aug 2012, at 13:34, Emmanuel Bernard wrote:
>
>> Of of the options is to have it defaulted to enabled. To disable validation or
change the default group, @MethodValidated would be necessary.
>> Is that what the EE spec leads had in mind?
>>
>> On 22 août 2012, at 13:23, Pete Muir wrote:
>>
>>> BTW the Java EE spec leads were concerned about the @MethodValidated
annotation being required at all.
>>>
>>> On 22 Aug 2012, at 12:19, Emmanuel Bernard wrote:
>>>
>>>> Yes, one of the consequences as you point out is that we will define the
@MethodValidated contract in BV.
>>>> While I think it's a good thing, I want everyone to understand this
consequence.
>>>>
>>>> On 15 août 2012, at 22:56, Gunnar Morling wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>
>>>>> based on an issue I recently filed, CDI lead Pete Muir started a
>>>>> thread on the integration of BV and CDI over on the CDI mailing list
>>>>> [1].
>>>>>
>>>>> The general question is where this integration should be described.
My
>>>>> first assumption was, that the Java EE platform spec. would be the
>>>>> right place for this is, but Java EE co-lead Bill Shannon pointed
out
>>>>> [2] that the preferred approach is to have such integrations
described
>>>>> in one of the involved technology specs.
>>>>>
>>>>> And actually we're already doing this to some degree as of the BV
1.1
>>>>> early draft [3]. So I guess our descriptions there need just to be a
>>>>> bit more authoritative ("must" instead of
"should" etc.) and specific.
>>>>> In section 3.7, the CDI spec. currently also mentions built-in beans
>>>>> for Validator and ValidatorFactory to be provided by a Java EE
>>>>> container. To consolidate the specs I tend to think that this
section
>>>>> should be merged into BV section 5.5.7.1.
>>>>>
>>>>> The same approach should probably also be taken for the description
of
>>>>> triggering method validation under Java EE using the
@MethodValidated
>>>>> annotation.
>>>>>
>>>>> Any thoughts?
>>>>>
>>>>> --Gunnar
>>>>>
>>>>> [1] http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/cdi-dev/2012-August/001978.html
>>>>> [2] http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/cdi-dev/2012-August/002045.html
>>>>> [3] http://beanvalidation.org/1.1/spec/#d0e6698
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> beanvalidation-dev mailing list
>>>>> beanvalidation-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/beanvalidation-dev
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
_______________________________________________
beanvalidation-dev mailing list
beanvalidation-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/beanvalidation-dev