Hi, I had asked for feedback on Twitter, too, and Mark Reinhold replied [1], suggesting to use "java.validation" (without the "x"). Turns out that any JCP-governed modules should use "java." as a prefix. I'll check with Linda, too. Though I wouldn't like "ee" in there too much, as BV equally targets EE as well as SE. Cheers, --Gunnar [1] https://twitter.com/gunnarmorling/status/857216338372288512. 2017-05-03 20:26 GMT+02:00 Michael Nascimento <misterm(a)gmail.com&gt;:

-1 on the EE prefix. Bean Validation is not (only) a EE spec.

In the JPA mailing list, Bill Shannon and Linda were saying specs shouldn't mention anything about modules at this point. Some suggested this could be done at the next MR. It's better to align with them then. Regards, Michael On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 10:52 AM, Gunnar Morling <gunnar(a)hibernate.org&gt; wrote:

Sounds great. Regards, Michael On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 8:33 AM, Gunnar Morling <gunnar(a)hibernate.org&gt; wrote:

+1 thanks Gunnar. marco On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 4:32 PM, Christian Kaltepoth <christian(a)kaltepoth.de > +1 > > 2017-05-16 15:00 GMT+02:00 Michael Nascimento <misterm(a)gmail.com&gt;: > >> Sounds great. >> >> Regards, >> Michael >> >> On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 8:33 AM, Gunnar Morling <gunnar(a)hibernate.org&gt; >>> >>> I've been discussing the issue of the module name a bit with Emmanuel >>> and we concluded that a non-binding recommendation in an appendix to >>> the BV 2.0 spec should be alright. I've filed PR >>> https://github.com/beanvalidation/beanvalidation-spec/pull/174 for it, >>> saying: >>> >>> "While not specified by this specification, Bean Validation >>> providers are encouraged to use the module name `java.validation` >>> in case they provide the Bean Validation API as a module for the Java >>> Platform Module System (as defined by JSR 376). >>> A mandatory module name - which may be `java.validation` or another >>> one - will be defined in a future revision of this specification." >>> >>> This leaves the door open for choosing another value - and making it >>> mandatory - down the road, while letting 2.0 providers converge on one >>> non-officially sanctioned name for the time being (which is needed for >>> the migration between providers). >>> >>> --Gunnar >>> >>> >>> 2017-05-09 18:50 GMT+02:00 Michael Nascimento <misterm(a)gmail.com&gt;: >>> > In the JPA mailing list, Bill Shannon and Linda were saying specs >>> shouldn't >>> > mention anything about modules at this point. Some suggested this >>> could be >>> > done at the next MR. It's better to align with them then. >>> > >>> > Regards, >>> > Michael >>> > >>> > On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 10:52 AM, Gunnar Morling <gunnar(a)hibernate.org&gt; >>> >>> >> >>> >> So "java.validation" should work (as a recommendation for now). >>> >> >>> >> But I've learned that Oracle-led JSRs (e.g. JAX-RS 2.1) don't mention >>> >> anything in the spec (JAX-RS reference API just has a module-info.java >>> >> with a name they chose). We could do the same, and just have that >>> >> "recommendation" by putting this name into the reference >>> >> validation-api JAR, hoping that alternative API providers (Geronimo) >>> >> would do the same. >>> >> >>> >> Personally I don't think there's much to loose by putting a >>> >> recommendation into a spec appendix. If needed, the name can change >>> >> when making it a mandatory thing in a future revision. >>> >> >>> >> Thoughts? >>> >> >>> >> --Gunnar >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> 2017-05-03 22:35 GMT+02:00 Emmanuel Bernard <emmanuel(a)hibernate.org&gt;: >>> >> > -1 on the EE prefix. Bean Validation is not (only) a EE spec. >>> >> > >>> >> > On 3 May 2017, at 20:26, Michael Nascimento <misterm(a)gmail.com&gt; >>>>> >> > >>> >> > I know it's late to reply to this, but seems fine. I'd consult the >>> Java >>> >> > EE >>> >> > EG just to make sure they don't want to use a javax.ee prefix >>> (which >>> >> > seems >>> >> > odd, though). Using the predominant/"root" package for the module is >>> >> > what >>> >> > I'd recommend too. >>> >> > >>> >> > Regards, >>> >> > Michael >>> >> > >>> >> > On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 10:22 AM, Gunnar Morling < >>> gunnar(a)hibernate.org&gt; >>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> Hi, >>> >> >> >>> >> >> Java 9 is still in the works, so it's too early to put anything >>> final >>> >> >> into the BV spec, but should we add a recommended module name for >>> API >>> >> >> modules? >>> >> >> >>> >> >> My thinking is to have a short appendix stating: >>> >> >> >>> >> >> "Implementors that wish to provide the Bean Validation API in >>> form >>> >> >> of a Java 9 module, >>> >> >> should use the module name "javax.validation". A mandatory >>> module >>> >> >> name will be >>> >> >> defined in a future revision of this specification". >>> >> >> >>> >> >> A commonly agreed on module name is required by Jigsaw to ensure >>> >> >> different API modules (e.g. the reference one and the one provided >>> by >>> >> >> Apache) are interchangeable. >>> >> >> >>> >> >> I expect further changes to the spec to support Java 9 down the >>> road >>> >> >> (e.g. to resolve message bundles in client modules and to provide a >>> >> >> way for passing in a Lookup granting private access (see [1]), but >>> >> >> it's nothing we can bake into the spec yet. >>> >> >> >>> >> >> Thoughts? >>> >> >> >>> >> >> --Gunnar >>> >> >> >>> >> >> [1] >>> >> >> >>> >> >> http://in.relation.to/2017/04/11/accessing-private-state-of- >>> java-9-modules/ >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >>> >> >> 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 >>> >> > >>> >> > >>> >> > _______________________________________________ >>> >> > 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 >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > _______________________________________________ >>> > 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 >>> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> beanvalidation-dev mailing list >> beanvalidation-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/beanvalidation-dev >> > > > > -- > Christian Kaltepoth > Blog: http://blog.kaltepoth.de/ > Twitter: http://twitter.com/chkal > GitHub: https://github.com/chkal > > > _______________________________________________ > beanvalidation-dev mailing list > beanvalidation-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/beanvalidation-dev >