Hehe, for now I've created a ticket [1] so we don't forget about it. --Gunnar [1] https://hibernate.onjira.com/browse/BVAL-266 2012/2/25 Hardy Ferentschik <hardy(a)hibernate.org&gt;: > > On Feb 25, 2012, at 14:15, Gunnar Morling <gunnar.morling(a)googlemail.com&gt; wrote: > >> Based on the contained classes I'm supposing that the BV spi package >> has a much more focused scope (bootstrapping). Then >> ParameterNameProvider should go into javax.validation. Any thoughts? > > I think you are right that the current API package is focused on bootstrapping. Unless the whole spi structure would get changed (which we really cannot do), I think the best option is javax.validation. > >> > > > --hardy > _______________________________________________ > beanvalidation-dev mailing list > beanvalidation-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/beanvalidation-dev

Ok, I'll add a TODO marker. Any suggestions? The use case would be a custom parameter name source, e.g. a custom annotation type. I guess mostly BV providers and integrators (e.g. JAX-RS could define a parameter name provider based on annotations such as @PathParam) will create name providers, but BV users might define one as well. --Gunnar 2012/2/26 Emmanuel Bernard <emmanuel(a)hibernate.org&gt;: > My initial intention of SPI was to separate classes that are never seen my a user of Bean Validation. BootstrapState and co are contracts only used between the BV provider and the bootstrap process or the container integration. On the other hands, j.v.bootstrap is visible by a user. > > > > +1 on better package descriptions. > > Emmanuel > > On 25 févr. 2012, at 14:15, Gunnar Morling wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> I'm in the process of integrating the method validation proposal into >> to the first draft of the spec. document. Thanks again for all >> comments and feedback. >> >> While going over the ParameterNameProvider interface I wondered where >> this interface should actually live. Should it be >> javax.validation.ParameterNameProvider or >> javax.validation.spi.ParameterNameProvider? Or put more generally, >> what's the intention of the spi package in the BV API? >> >> ParameterNameProvider is intended to be implemented by BV providers, >> integrators and clients. According to my understanding of the SPI idea >> (separate parts intended to be *implemented* by clients [SPI] from >> parts intended to be *used* by clients [API]) therefore I'd say it's a >> candidate for the SPI package. But following that reasoning, for >> instance also the ConstraintValidator interface should be part of the >> spi package, which it isn't in BV 1.0. >> >> Based on the contained classes I'm supposing that the BV spi package >> has a much more focused scope (bootstrapping). Then >> ParameterNameProvider should go into javax.validation. Any thoughts? >> >> Btw. there isn't much package-level JavaDoc for the BV API in general >> (only for javax.validation.groups). I think we should add some more >> for BV 1.1. WDYT? >> >> --Gunnar >> _______________________________________________ >> 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