April 2019 - jboss-jira - Jboss List Archives

[JBoss JIRA] (WFLY-11956) @PostConstruct on @ApplicationScoped bean called too late in case @Valid is annotated on a business method

by Ronald Sigal (Jira)

[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/WFLY-11956?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin... ] Ronald Sigal commented on WFLY-11956: ------------------------------------- [~gunnar.morling], I got a response from Santiago. I'm still digesting it: ======================================== Hi Ron, See inline. > Hi Santiago, > > I just created https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/jaxrs-api/issues/759. > > As for the "if enabled", I had some confusion on that point, but then I thought Guillaume Smet from the Hibernate Validator project clarified it. In particular, he said that GreetingModel in > > @GET > @Valid > @Produces(MediaType.APPLICATION_JSON) > GreetingModel getHelloGreeting() {...} > > is getting validated during the property validation phase, rather than when getHelloGretting() is called as a resource method. Right, so having a resource method that looks like a getter is bad idea to begin with. Section 7.4 of the JAX-RS spec talks specifically about this case. > > To quote him, "When validating the bean in JaxrsInjectionTarget, you validate the bean itself and thus all its properties - so all the fields and getters. It is not method validation but property validation. That's why your configuration in the XML file is useless. Getters are already not validated methods by default. But... they are validated when you validate the properties of a bean", where, by "your configuration in the XML file" he is referring to > > <executable-validation> > <default-validated-executable-types> > <executable-type>CONSTRUCTORS</executable-type> > <executable-type>NON_GETTER_METHODS</executable-type> > </default-validated-executable-types> > </executable-validation> > > So, the point is that there seems to be no mechanism for disabling getter validation during the field/property validation phase. So "if enabled" doesn't seem to be applicable. Does that make sense? Looks like there may have been some confusion here. We certainly heard at the time “Getters are not validated by default” and that is what prompted the creation of Section 7.4. I don’t believe we heard that they were validated in some other phase. If so, there’s a clear disconnect in the JAX-RS spec. It’s interesting because the JAX-RS spec was reviewed by validation experts at the time. I must say, it would make more sense for getters to be validated. Perhaps the scope of your issue needs to be broaden to cover this … — Santiago > On 4/26/19 2:05 PM, Santiago > Pericas-Geertsen wrote: >> Ron, >> >> I agree, the JAX-RS spec should mention @PostContruct as part of the validation process. Do you want to file an issue? >> >> Incidentally, the “if enabled” is because getters are not validated by default as described in Section 7.4 of the JAX-RS spec. >> >> — Santiago >> >>> On Apr 26, 2019, at 12:03 PM, Ron Sigal <rsigal(a)redhat.com> wrote: >>> >>> The spirit of the validation process is that validation of fields/properties should take place after injection and initialization has occurred. Given that further initialization could take place in a @PostConstruct annotated method, shouldn't the spec mention that? >>> >>> This question arose from discussion in https://issues.jboss.org/browse/WFLY-11956 "@PostConstruct on @ApplicationScoped bean called too late in case @Valid is annotated on a business method". >>> >>> -Ron > @PostConstruct on @ApplicationScoped bean called too late in case @Valid is annotated on a business method > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Key: WFLY-11956 > URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/WFLY-11956 > Project: WildFly > Issue Type: Bug > Components: Bean Validation, REST > Affects Versions: 16.0.0.Final > Reporter: Joerg Baesner > Assignee: Ronald Sigal > Priority: Major > Attachments: logging.txt, playground.zip > > > Having a bean class with {{@ApplicationScoped}}, which has a {{@PostConstruct}} and is implementing the following _Interface_: > {code} > @Path("/validated") > public interface ValidatedJaxRsInterface { > > @GET > @Valid > @Produces(MediaType.APPLICATION_JSON) > GreetingModel getHelloGreeting(); > } > {code} > will result in calling the {{getHelloGreeting}} method of the implementation class twice *_before_* the {{@PostConstruct}} is getting executed. > This can be reproduced with the attached reproducer application... -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v7.12.1#712002)

6 years, 6 months

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] (SWSQE-709) Push Kiali-QE Builds To Quay.io

by Matthew Mahoney (Jira)

[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/SWSQE-709?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.... ] Matthew Mahoney commented on SWSQE-709: --------------------------------------- Branch with install_kiali.sh enhancments: https://gitlab.cee.redhat.com/istio/kiali-qe/kiali-qe-utils/tree/SWSQE-709 Kiali builds pushed to quay.io: https://quay.io/repository/kiali-qe/kiali?tab=tags Jenkins job (added param CONTAINER_STORAGE): - Looks like tag is incorrect: quay.io/docker.io/kialiqe/kiali:latestcore1040 - http://jenkins2.bc.jonqe.lab.eng.bos.redhat.com:8080/job/Kiali-on-Openshi... > Push Kiali-QE Builds To Quay.io > ------------------------------- > > Key: SWSQE-709 > URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/SWSQE-709 > Project: Kiali QE > Issue Type: Task > Reporter: Matthew Mahoney > Assignee: Matthew Mahoney > Priority: Major > Labels: infrastructure > > Push kialiqe builds to Quay.io, and not Dockerhub. > Perhaps there is an alternative internal Repo. If not Quay.io seems to be the direction the team is headed. -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v7.12.1#712002)

6 years, 6 months

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] (SWSQE-665) Test case coverage for Istio

by Yuanlin Xu (Jira)

[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/SWSQE-665?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.... ] Yuanlin Xu resolved SWSQE-665. ------------------------------ Resolution: Done We don't have missing fields when we are testing Istio now. This task is done. > Test case coverage for Istio > ---------------------------- > > Key: SWSQE-665 > URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/SWSQE-665 > Project: Kiali QE > Issue Type: QE Task > Reporter: Prachi Yadav > Assignee: Yuanlin Xu > Priority: Major > Labels: pqi > > Some areas are missing which we are not testing for Istio. Need to focus on that. -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v7.12.1#712002)

6 years, 6 months

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] (SWSQE-668) Checklist for custom fields in order to support existing and future workflows for Istio

by Yuanlin Xu (Jira)

[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/SWSQE-668?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.... ] Yuanlin Xu commented on SWSQE-668: ---------------------------------- We don't see QE Test Coverage, SFDC Cases Counter , SFDC Cases Links fields in MaistraIstio Polarion project. It looks like they are general Polarion fields and we don't have access to search them. > Checklist for custom fields in order to support existing and future workflows for Istio > --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Key: SWSQE-668 > URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/SWSQE-668 > Project: Kiali QE > Issue Type: QE Task > Reporter: Prachi Yadav > Assignee: Yuanlin Xu > Priority: Major > Labels: pqi > > project MUST have the following custom fields in order to support existing and future workflows and visualizations: > QE Test Coverage with values +, -, and ? (Null is supported) > SFDC Cases Counter > SFDC Cases Links > These custom fields must exist as above so that we do not need to customize logic for any one-offs. The SFDC Cases * fields are there to support "integration" with our SalesForce system used by CEE/GSS for customer cases and the links here are links to SFDC customer cases. -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v7.12.1#712002)

6 years, 6 months

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] (SWSQE-654) Istio-Investigate and work on automated/not automated/only manual type of test cases and mark them in polarion

by Yuanlin Xu (Jira)

[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/SWSQE-654?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.... ] Yuanlin Xu resolved SWSQE-654. ------------------------------ Resolution: Done All Istio test cases have marked automated or not automated in Polarion. This task is done. > Istio-Investigate and work on automated/not automated/only manual type of test cases and mark them in polarion > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Key: SWSQE-654 > URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/SWSQE-654 > Project: Kiali QE > Issue Type: QE Task > Reporter: Sunil Kondkar > Assignee: Yuanlin Xu > Priority: Major > Labels: pqi > > Istio-Investigate and work on automated/not automated/only manual type of test cases and mark them in polarion -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v7.12.1#712002)

6 years, 6 months

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] (SWSQE-712) Ability to create 2nd bookinfo via operator

by Matthew Mahoney (Jira)

[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/SWSQE-712?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.... ] Matthew Mahoney updated SWSQE-712: ---------------------------------- Sprint: Kiali Sprint #22 (was: Kiali Sprint #21) > Ability to create 2nd bookinfo via operator > ------------------------------------------- > > Key: SWSQE-712 > URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/SWSQE-712 > Project: Kiali QE > Issue Type: QE Task > Reporter: Hayk Hovsepyan > Priority: Major > Labels: infrastructure > > Currently our https://jenkins2.bc.jonqe.lab.eng.bos.redhat.com:8443/job/bookinfo-operator/ > jenkins job allows to create only one bookinfo namespace. > But UI Automation framework requires bookinfo2 namespace for parallel running. -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v7.12.1#712002)

6 years, 6 months

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] (SWSQE-640) Kiali Pipeline 3.0

by Matthew Mahoney (Jira)

[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/SWSQE-640?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.... ] Matthew Mahoney updated SWSQE-640: ---------------------------------- Sprint: Kiali Sprint #22 (was: Kiali Sprint #21) > Kiali Pipeline 3.0 > ------------------ > > Key: SWSQE-640 > URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/SWSQE-640 > Project: Kiali QE > Issue Type: Story > Reporter: Guilherme Baufaker Rêgo > Assignee: Guilherme Baufaker Rêgo > Priority: Critical > Labels: infrastructure > > Since we are moving from Ansible Upstream installer ( it will be deprecated on Istio 1.1 (https://github.com/istio/istio/issues/12262), Bookinfo has been updated on Kiali Test Mesh Operator (KIALI-2520 and SWSQE-594) and we are moving to central-ci Jenkins, move to DSL jobs, I think it is a good opportunity to make a better pipeline with small number of jobs (currently we have lot of jobs which are not technically accurate anymore) > At least these jobs need to change: > - Nightly Jobs > - Complex Mesh > - Kiali Test Meshes > - Clean Istio Resources > - Istio Upstream > - Kiali on Openshift > - Istio and Kiali on Openshift > - Maistra Job (it might need to change because the new operator based on golang) -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v7.12.1#712002)

6 years, 6 months

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] (SWSQE-699) Code coverage for kiali

by Matthew Mahoney (Jira)

[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/SWSQE-699?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.... ] Matthew Mahoney updated SWSQE-699: ---------------------------------- Sprint: Kiali Sprint #22 (was: Kiali Sprint #21) > Code coverage for kiali > ----------------------- > > Key: SWSQE-699 > URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/SWSQE-699 > Project: Kiali QE > Issue Type: Story > Reporter: Filip Brychta > Assignee: Filip Brychta > Priority: Major > Labels: infrastructure > > It would be nice to have code coverage report for kiali. We can generate report for all existing test suites. -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v7.12.1#712002)

6 years, 6 months

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] (SWSQE-709) Push Kiali-QE Builds To Quay.io

by Matthew Mahoney (Jira)

[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/SWSQE-709?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.... ] Matthew Mahoney updated SWSQE-709: ---------------------------------- Sprint: Kiali Sprint #22 (was: Kiali Sprint #21) > Push Kiali-QE Builds To Quay.io > ------------------------------- > > Key: SWSQE-709 > URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/SWSQE-709 > Project: Kiali QE > Issue Type: Task > Reporter: Matthew Mahoney > Assignee: Matthew Mahoney > Priority: Major > Labels: infrastructure > > Push kialiqe builds to Quay.io, and not Dockerhub. > Perhaps there is an alternative internal Repo. If not Quay.io seems to be the direction the team is headed. -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v7.12.1#712002)

6 years, 6 months

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] (SWSQE-704) Review jenkins2 settings

by Matthew Mahoney (Jira)

[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/SWSQE-704?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.... ] Matthew Mahoney updated SWSQE-704: ---------------------------------- Sprint: Kiali Sprint #22 (was: Kiali Sprint #21) > Review jenkins2 settings > ------------------------ > > Key: SWSQE-704 > URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/SWSQE-704 > Project: Kiali QE > Issue Type: QE Task > Reporter: Filip Brychta > Assignee: Filip Brychta > Priority: Major > Labels: infrastructure > > Check https://jenkins2.bc.jonqe.lab.eng.bos.redhat.com:8443/configure for kubernetes settings and usage of b21.jonqe.lab.eng.bos.redhat.com which is now part of prod cluster. > Also update https://mojo.redhat.com/docs/DOC-1168333 -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v7.12.1#712002)

6 years, 6 months

1
0
0 / 0

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

jboss-jira April 2019