[bv-dev] Support DI within constraint validators

[Gunnar Morling]

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 at 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 at lists.jboss.org
>>>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/beanvalidation-dev
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> beanvalidation-dev mailing list
> beanvalidation-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/beanvalidation-dev