[wildfly-dev] Bringing Bean Validation 2.0 to WildFly

[Martin Kouba]

FYI the same applies to Weld 3.0/CDI 2 except that CDI 2.0 and Weld 
3.0.0.Final were released already. Right now, we provide a patch for 
both WildFly 10.1.0 and 11.0.0.Alpha1 [1].

BTW there is also SWARM-731 [2] - Investigate creation of CDI 2.0 / Weld 
3.0 fractions.

Martin

[1]
http://download.jboss.org/weld/3.0.0.Final/

[2]
https://issues.jboss.org/browse/SWARM-731


Dne 13.7.2017 v 10:50 Gunnar Morling napsal(a):
> Hi,
> 
> <TL,DR>Should we update WildFly to BV 2.0 and Hibernate Validator 6.0, 
> or should new modules be added for those, letting the user to choose the 
> version to enable?</TL,DR>
> 
> The Bean Validation 2.0 spec (JSR 380) is almost done [1], so I'd like 
> to discuss how BV 2 and its reference implementation HV 6 can be 
> integrated into WildFly. BV 2 will be part of Java EE 8.
> 
> I can think of two approaches:
> 
> 1) Just updating the existing WildFly modules for BV API and HV to the 
> new versions
> 2) Leave the existing modules for BV 1.1 (+ implementation) and add 
> separate modules for BV 2.0
> 
> 1) would be easier and less effort. But I'm not sure how feasible it is, 
> in case that WF should remain Java EE 7 compatible for the time being. 
> Also, while BV 2 is fully backwards compatible at the spec-level, 
> Hibernate Validator amends the spec API with some extended 
> functionality. In that extended HV-specific API some changes were 
> required, mostly as previous experimental features were replaced by 
> equivalent standardized functionality in the BV API.
> 
> 2) would let the user chose between BV 1.1 and 2.0, but it'd entail some 
> more work:
> 
> * A place for that configuration is required. I think it could be done 
> similarly to JPA, i.e. via a property with the module name in 
> META-INF/validation.xml
> * Depending on that configuration, the right set of modules needs to be 
> enabled. Several modules currently have a fixed dependency to the 
> "org.hibernate.validator:main" module (e.g. JPA, Weld, JCA, RestEasy) 
> which would have be made more dynamic, based on the version chosen by 
> the user.
> 
> What does everyone think on this? And what could be a suitable WildFly 
> target version for such change? Could we aim at incorporating BV 2.0 
> into WF 11?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> --Gunnar
> 
> [1] 
> http://beanvalidation.org/news/2017/07/12/bean-validation-2-0-cr3-submitted-to-final-approval-ballot/
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> wildfly-dev mailing list
> wildfly-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/wildfly-dev
> 

-- 
Martin Kouba
Senior Software Engineer
Red Hat, Czech Republic