[bv-dev] Should getters be considered methods during validation

[Emmanuel Bernard]

Having multiple definitions of package annotations for a given package (via split packages) is equivalent to having the same class name used twice in a split package. The first version found in your class path is the one used by the VM. 
I don't think we should use a different rule. And to me the same class define twice is of the same level of error as a package-info.java defined twice for the same package. 

On 13 déc. 2012, at 16:40, Matt Benson <mbenson at apache.org> wrote:

> I think folk not being used to package annotations was a big part of Gerhard's objections, but what I personally find more problematic is the fact that multiple jars could conceivably include annotations for the same package.  We might respond to that with a rule that a package annotation is only applied to the archive in which it is found, but then, AFAICT, an implementor would have to resort to bytecode analysis in order to sort out which setting applies to which jar.  That could be more cleanly done by using a resource-based mechanism for package configs per containing jar, but then we're left with the IMO somewhat ugly situation of disparate mechanisms for package config vs. everything else.
> 
> Matt
> 
> 
> On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 3:28 AM, Emmanuel Bernard <emmanuel at hibernate.org> wrote:
>> On Wed 2012-12-12 21:02, Gerhard Petracek wrote:
>> > i had a nice discussion with matt.
>> > since bv 1.0 only supports one validation.xml, i'm ok with a package config
>> > in validation.xml.
>> > however, package annotations are in most cases just unexpected (and
>> > error-prone).
>> > (e.g. in deltaspike we dropped such annotations because of that.)
>> 
>> I am curious about that. What makes you say that? What made them
>> error-prone for Deltaspike?
>> You mean unexpected because people are not used to them?
>> 
>> Emmanuel
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/beanvalidation-dev/attachments/20121213/a2d2f433/attachment.html