You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@bval.apache.org by Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com> on 2013/06/13 08:33:18 UTC
to bval 1.1?
Hi guys,
would be great to start working on bval 1.1 but we need to correctly handle
bval 1.0.
ATM the last release is 0.5 and the trunk is 0.6-SNAPSHOT. Discussing about
it with Mark we thought it would be great to get a bval-1.0 maybe then
update trunk to work on 1.1.
wdyt?
*Romain Manni-Bucau*
*Twitter: @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau>*
*Blog: **http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/*<http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/>
*LinkedIn: **http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau*
*Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau*
Re: to bval 1.1?
Posted by Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>.
about cdi interceptor stuff we have it in tomee for years:
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tomee/tomee/trunk/container/openejb-core/src/main/java/org/apache/openejb/bval/BeanValidationAppendixInterceptor.java
just need to use bval 1.1 APIs
*Romain Manni-Bucau*
*Twitter: @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau>*
*Blog: **http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/*<http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/>
*LinkedIn: **http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau*
*Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau*
2013/6/13 Matt Benson <gu...@gmail.com>
> No plan per se; someone should pop the features into JIRA and we can go
> from there. Off the top of my head the big items are method validation and
> CDI. Hopefully it won't be a huge leap to bridge our existing method
> validation to the spec, backward-compatibly if possible.
>
> I've been unwilling to do any more big refactorings in the codebase until
> we sort out the privileged stuff; Mark and I have been working on the
> privilizer component of/and Commons [weaver] and what's in trunk works more
> or less but I'm not satisfied with the existing Javassist implementation
> because it refuses to create working bytecode for valid code and I can't
> get any support, so I've been rewriting to use ASM as time permits (it
> hasn't permitted much). :|
>
> Thanks for jumping in, Romain!
>
> Matt
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 8:22 AM, Albert Lee <al...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > +1.
> >
> > Do we have any plan implementing 1.1 spec?
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 1:33 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau
> > <rm...@gmail.com>wrote:
> >
> > > Hi guys,
> > >
> > >
> > > would be great to start working on bval 1.1 but we need to correctly
> > handle
> > > bval 1.0.
> > >
> > > ATM the last release is 0.5 and the trunk is 0.6-SNAPSHOT. Discussing
> > about
> > > it with Mark we thought it would be great to get a bval-1.0 maybe then
> > > update trunk to work on 1.1.
> > >
> > > wdyt?
> > >
> > > *Romain Manni-Bucau*
> > > *Twitter: @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau>*
> > > *Blog: **http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/*<
> > > http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/>
> > > *LinkedIn: **http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau*
> > > *Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau*
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Albert Lee.
> >
>
Re: to bval 1.1?
Posted by Matt Benson <gu...@gmail.com>.
No plan per se; someone should pop the features into JIRA and we can go
from there. Off the top of my head the big items are method validation and
CDI. Hopefully it won't be a huge leap to bridge our existing method
validation to the spec, backward-compatibly if possible.
I've been unwilling to do any more big refactorings in the codebase until
we sort out the privileged stuff; Mark and I have been working on the
privilizer component of/and Commons [weaver] and what's in trunk works more
or less but I'm not satisfied with the existing Javassist implementation
because it refuses to create working bytecode for valid code and I can't
get any support, so I've been rewriting to use ASM as time permits (it
hasn't permitted much). :|
Thanks for jumping in, Romain!
Matt
On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 8:22 AM, Albert Lee <al...@gmail.com> wrote:
> +1.
>
> Do we have any plan implementing 1.1 spec?
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 1:33 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau
> <rm...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
> > Hi guys,
> >
> >
> > would be great to start working on bval 1.1 but we need to correctly
> handle
> > bval 1.0.
> >
> > ATM the last release is 0.5 and the trunk is 0.6-SNAPSHOT. Discussing
> about
> > it with Mark we thought it would be great to get a bval-1.0 maybe then
> > update trunk to work on 1.1.
> >
> > wdyt?
> >
> > *Romain Manni-Bucau*
> > *Twitter: @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau>*
> > *Blog: **http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/*<
> > http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/>
> > *LinkedIn: **http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau*
> > *Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau*
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Albert Lee.
>
Re: to bval 1.1?
Posted by Albert Lee <al...@gmail.com>.
+1.
Do we have any plan implementing 1.1 spec?
On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 1:33 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau
<rm...@gmail.com>wrote:
> Hi guys,
>
>
> would be great to start working on bval 1.1 but we need to correctly handle
> bval 1.0.
>
> ATM the last release is 0.5 and the trunk is 0.6-SNAPSHOT. Discussing about
> it with Mark we thought it would be great to get a bval-1.0 maybe then
> update trunk to work on 1.1.
>
> wdyt?
>
> *Romain Manni-Bucau*
> *Twitter: @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau>*
> *Blog: **http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/*<
> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/>
> *LinkedIn: **http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau*
> *Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau*
>
--
Albert Lee.