[bv-dev] BVAL-289 renaming methods or follow along

[Rich Midwinter]

I'm not convinced the proposed new names are particularly clear at first
glance, although I'd concede they're a more accurate description.

I'd probably favour the current naming convention.

Rich.
On May 31, 2012 6:16 AM, "Michael Nascimento" <misterm at gmail.com> wrote:

> It is not a widely used part of the API and the suggested names make
> more sense, so I vote for using new consistent names and deprecate the
> old ones.
>
> Regards,
> Michael
>
> On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 9:24 AM, Emmanuel Bernard
> <emmanuel at hibernate.org> wrote:
> > Can you guys weight in on this issue
> https://hibernate.onjira.com/browse/BVAL-289
> >
> > 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/20120531/dd6303cd/attachment.html