Re: [bv-dev] Method validation - cont'd
2012/5/15 Emmanuel Bernard <emmanuel(a)hibernate.org>:
On 14 mai 2012, at 20:24, Gunnar Morling wrote:
>>> * Should ParameterNameProvider go into a sub-package?
>
>> which one do you have in mind there?
>
> Normally I'd lean towards to javax.validation.spi, since PNP is
> something which is implemented by clients. But I think in BV 1.0, the
> "spi" package is centered more around bootstrapping.
>
> So personally I'd be fine with leaving PNP directly within javax.validation.
>
> Emmanuel, I think you originally raised the idea of putting it into a
> separate package. Do you have anything special in mind here?
I think I was wrong. I would love to get the class in a subpackage because I find
javax.validation quite crowded but
ParameterNameProvider is no different than MessageInterpolator or TraversableResolver.
Ok, then I'd say let's leave it in javax.validation. A new package
only for ParameterNameProvider doesn't make much sense, and adding it
to j.v.spi doesn't feel right to me, as then also some other types
should consequently go there, which we can't do right now.
--Gunnar
_______________________________________________
beanvalidation-dev mailing list
beanvalidation-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/beanvalidation-dev