You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@commons.apache.org by Niall Pemberton <ni...@blueyonder.co.uk> on 2004/12/04 00:14:00 UTC
[Validator] Plans for Validator 1.2 and beyond
I'd like to propose that we target a Validator 1.2 release in the next
couple of months. I have three motivations for this:
1) I'd like it to include the JavaScript Extension I've proposed in Bug
#32343 and along with inheritance and a couple of other features think it
would make a great release.
2) Seems that over on the Struts Dev list people are chomping at the bit to
start work on Struts 1.3 and IMO it would be good to get a Validator 1.2 out
of the door so that Struts 1.3 can take adavantage of a released Validator
1.2 version early in its development cycle. Compared to previous experiences
with Struts & Validator, this would put us ahead of the game, allowing
Validator to be well bedded in before a Struts 1.3 releasee.
3) Once Validator 1.2 is out of the door, we can throw the baby out with the
bath water and plunge into Validator 2.0 - yeah!
If people buy into this, then the next step is to agree the scope of whats
going to be in a 1.2 release. My thoughts are the following....
1) Inheritance (Already Implemented)
===========
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27870
I believe this is currently the only major difference between Validator 1.2
and Validator 1.1.4 - I haven't yet had time to test out Validator 1.2 - but
plan to do so shortly. This is a great feature though and I'm sure would be
greatly appreciated in a release by the user community.
2) JavaScript Extension
==================
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32343
I just posted a 1.0.8 version which I hope is pretty close to being ready
for inclusion in Validator - following feedback from a few people. The one
concern I have is that until recently I didn't know much about JavaScript
and as well as adding the dynamic JavaScript generation I've done wholesale
refactoring of the existing static JavaScript Validators. No ones posted -ve
feedback yet on the JavaScript and I'm hoping that people who've had a look
at it are a. know JavaScript well and b. have looked closely at what I've
done. Unless people object or want more time to consider/evaluate this, I
plan to add this in next week or so - although there needs to be some
discussion about how it should be integrated first (I will give ample
warning before I actually do anything).
As a side benefit, I believe the following will also be resolved when/if
this is included:
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21043
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23372
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27414
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22687
3) Remove <arg position=""> attribute
=============================
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31194
I had a brain fart when I applied a patch for this and as David Graham
pointed out should have been so quick off the mark at putting it in. I have
attached a new patch for this a while ago, but no feedback so far. I would
like to apply this - any objections?
4) Enable Variables to come From Message Resources
=========================================
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32522
I just posted this and its probably a fairly minor change, but I believe it
"completes the circle" for i18n applications. Currently you can have a i18n
application with one <formset> for messages, but not for the variables. With
validators such as mask and date their variables are often locale specific,
so IMO this would make life alot easier for i18n.
5) Outstanding Bugs
================
Theres currently 12 outstanding bugs - I believe the JavaScript Extension
resolves the following
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14471
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30872
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31534
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31790
>From a quick review of the rest the ones IMO that initially look like they
need to be addressed are
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29541
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30686
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30955
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31644
Niall
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: [Validator] Plans for Validator 1.2 and beyond
Posted by Rory Winston <rw...@eircom.net>.
Niall,
Sounds great. +1
Cheers,
Rory
Niall Pemberton wrote:
>I'd like to propose that we target a Validator 1.2 release in the next
>couple of months. I have three motivations for this:
>
>1) I'd like it to include the JavaScript Extension I've proposed in Bug
>#32343 and along with inheritance and a couple of other features think it
>would make a great release.
>
>2) Seems that over on the Struts Dev list people are chomping at the bit to
>start work on Struts 1.3 and IMO it would be good to get a Validator 1.2 out
>of the door so that Struts 1.3 can take adavantage of a released Validator
>1.2 version early in its development cycle. Compared to previous experiences
>with Struts & Validator, this would put us ahead of the game, allowing
>Validator to be well bedded in before a Struts 1.3 releasee.
>
>3) Once Validator 1.2 is out of the door, we can throw the baby out with the
>bath water and plunge into Validator 2.0 - yeah!
>
>
>If people buy into this, then the next step is to agree the scope of whats
>going to be in a 1.2 release. My thoughts are the following....
>
>
>1) Inheritance (Already Implemented)
>===========
>http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27870
>
>I believe this is currently the only major difference between Validator 1.2
>and Validator 1.1.4 - I haven't yet had time to test out Validator 1.2 - but
>plan to do so shortly. This is a great feature though and I'm sure would be
>greatly appreciated in a release by the user community.
>
>
>2) JavaScript Extension
>==================
>http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32343
>
>I just posted a 1.0.8 version which I hope is pretty close to being ready
>for inclusion in Validator - following feedback from a few people. The one
>concern I have is that until recently I didn't know much about JavaScript
>and as well as adding the dynamic JavaScript generation I've done wholesale
>refactoring of the existing static JavaScript Validators. No ones posted -ve
>feedback yet on the JavaScript and I'm hoping that people who've had a look
>at it are a. know JavaScript well and b. have looked closely at what I've
>done. Unless people object or want more time to consider/evaluate this, I
>plan to add this in next week or so - although there needs to be some
>discussion about how it should be integrated first (I will give ample
>warning before I actually do anything).
>
>As a side benefit, I believe the following will also be resolved when/if
>this is included:
>
>http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21043
>http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23372
>http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27414
>http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22687
>
>3) Remove <arg position=""> attribute
>=============================
>http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31194
>
>I had a brain fart when I applied a patch for this and as David Graham
>pointed out should have been so quick off the mark at putting it in. I have
>attached a new patch for this a while ago, but no feedback so far. I would
>like to apply this - any objections?
>
>4) Enable Variables to come From Message Resources
>=========================================
>http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32522
>
>I just posted this and its probably a fairly minor change, but I believe it
>"completes the circle" for i18n applications. Currently you can have a i18n
>application with one <formset> for messages, but not for the variables. With
>validators such as mask and date their variables are often locale specific,
>so IMO this would make life alot easier for i18n.
>
>5) Outstanding Bugs
>================
>Theres currently 12 outstanding bugs - I believe the JavaScript Extension
>resolves the following
>
>http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14471
>http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30872
>http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31534
>http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31790
>
>>>From a quick review of the rest the ones IMO that initially look like they
>need to be addressed are
>
>http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29541
>http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30686
>http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30955
>http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31644
>
>
>Niall
>
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
>For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
>
>
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org