You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@cxf.apache.org by Benson Margulies <bi...@gmail.com> on 2015/12/11 17:19:31 UTC
Fixing up bean validation in OSGi
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CXF-6706
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CXF-6705
The changes I've committed for CXF-6705 make it possible to use bean
validation, but ...
1: only with hibernate
2: only with extra code to obtain the validation provider.
This raises two questions.
1: should I restructure the features to split
'cxf-bean-validation-hibernate' from 'cxf-bean-validation', leaving
room for bval?
2: should I put the code in place that actually makes it work, and, if
so, where? I think it would be an additional bundle under 'osgi' that
provided a BeanValidationProviderFactory or a
ValidationProviderHelper.
Re: Fixing up bean validation in OSGi
Posted by Christian Schneider <ch...@die-schneider.net>.
If you want to provide a pull request for karaf I would be happy to apply
it.
Christian
2015-12-15 4:55 GMT+01:00 Benson Margulies <bi...@gmail.com>:
> Or move them to Karaf, for that matter.
>
>
> On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 3:25 PM, Benson Margulies <bi...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > I've had a PR outstanding at Bval for weeks, with no response to the
> > email or JIRA. My patch might fix it's current behavior in OSGi for
> > me, which is to call every bean valid. If any of you can wake the bval
> > committers up from their, ahem, hibernating state, I would work
> > further on it. I'm happy to set up dueling hibernate and bval features
> > in CXF for 3.2.0.
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 1:38 PM, Christian Schneider
> > <ch...@die-schneider.net> wrote:
> >> +1 for making the bean-validation feature independent from hibernate. I
> >> intended to do this for 3.2 anyway. I propose to just add the
> >> javax.validation api bundle with dependency=true and remove the
> reference
> >> to the bean-validation-core feature. Not sure if this is a good idea in
> >> 3.1.x as it is slightly incompatible.
> >>
> >> I am -1 of adding a bval feature to CXF. Instead let us create the
> feature
> >> either in karaf or directly provided by bval which I think would be the
> >> best option. I offer my help in doing so.
> >>
> >> Christian
> >>
> >> 2015-12-14 13:37 GMT+01:00 Francesco Chicchiriccò <ilgrosso@apache.org
> >:
> >>
> >>> On 14/12/2015 13:34, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> 2015-12-14 13:17 GMT+01:00 Francesco Chicchiriccò <
> ilgrosso@apache.org>:
> >>>>
> >>>> On 14/12/2015 12:59, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 2015-12-14 12:45 GMT+01:00 Sergey Beryozkin <sb...@gmail.com>:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Hi Benson
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On 11/12/15 16:19, Benson Margulies wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CXF-6706
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CXF-6705
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> The changes I've committed for CXF-6705 make it possible to use
> bean
> >>>>>>>> validation, but ...
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> 1: only with hibernate
> >>>>>>>> 2: only with extra code to obtain the validation provider.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> This raises two questions.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> 1: should I restructure the features to split
> >>>>>>>> 'cxf-bean-validation-hibernate' from 'cxf-bean-validation',
> leaving
> >>>>>>>> room for bval?
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Please, I've heard Apache BVal is less complete, but I think we
> should
> >>>>>>> keep the option open for users who would like to experiment with
> this
> >>>>>>> Apache project
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Hi guys, happy to help fixing any gap there if you need. BVal
> passes
> >>>>>> TCKs
> >>>>>> so IMO it is a valid option.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Hi Romain,
> >>>>> AFAICT, current BVal release (2012!) passes the TCK for JSR-303 (e.g.
> >>>>> Bean
> >>>>> Validation 1.0), not JSR-349 (e.g. Bean Validation 1.1)
> >>>>>
> >>>>> http://bval.apache.org/downloads.html
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Am I wrong?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Incidentally, this is the reason why we had to switch from BVal to
> >>>>> Hibernate Validator in Syncope, a couple of major releases ago.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/apache/bval/bval-jsr/1.1.0/
> passes 1.1
> >>>> TCKs (we renamed the main artifact cause naming jsr303 a jsr349 impl
> was
> >>>> odd). Will see if I can update the website - this is one area I didnt
> work
> >>>> on yet.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> Oh, that's good to hear, thanks for update.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Regards.
> >>>
> >>> 2: should I put the code in place that actually makes it work, and, if
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> so, where? I think it would be an additional bundle under 'osgi'
> that
> >>>>>>>> provided a BeanValidationProviderFactory or a
> >>>>>>>> ValidationProviderHelper.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> I guess the servicemix API spec bundle should help.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Hi JB, do you think a new BVal spec bundle may need to be
> released ?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> See https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SMX4-1618, in the
> >>>>>>> description,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Thanks, Sergey
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>> --
> >>> Francesco Chicchiriccò
> >>>
> >>> Tirasa - Open Source Excellence
> >>> http://www.tirasa.net/
> >>>
> >>> Involved at The Apache Software Foundation:
> >>> member, Syncope PMC chair, Cocoon PMC, Olingo PMC, CXF committer
> >>> http://home.apache.org/~ilgrosso/
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> --
> >> Christian Schneider
> >> http://www.liquid-reality.de
> >> <
> https://owa.talend.com/owa/redir.aspx?C=3aa4083e0c744ae1ba52bd062c5a7e46&URL=http%3a%2f%2fwww.liquid-reality.de
> >
> >>
> >> Open Source Architect
> >> http://www.talend.com
> >> <
> https://owa.talend.com/owa/redir.aspx?C=3aa4083e0c744ae1ba52bd062c5a7e46&URL=http%3a%2f%2fwww.talend.com
> >
>
--
--
Christian Schneider
http://www.liquid-reality.de
<https://owa.talend.com/owa/redir.aspx?C=3aa4083e0c744ae1ba52bd062c5a7e46&URL=http%3a%2f%2fwww.liquid-reality.de>
Open Source Architect
http://www.talend.com
<https://owa.talend.com/owa/redir.aspx?C=3aa4083e0c744ae1ba52bd062c5a7e46&URL=http%3a%2f%2fwww.talend.com>
Re: Fixing up bean validation in OSGi
Posted by Benson Margulies <bi...@gmail.com>.
Or move them to Karaf, for that matter.
On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 3:25 PM, Benson Margulies <bi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I've had a PR outstanding at Bval for weeks, with no response to the
> email or JIRA. My patch might fix it's current behavior in OSGi for
> me, which is to call every bean valid. If any of you can wake the bval
> committers up from their, ahem, hibernating state, I would work
> further on it. I'm happy to set up dueling hibernate and bval features
> in CXF for 3.2.0.
>
>
> On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 1:38 PM, Christian Schneider
> <ch...@die-schneider.net> wrote:
>> +1 for making the bean-validation feature independent from hibernate. I
>> intended to do this for 3.2 anyway. I propose to just add the
>> javax.validation api bundle with dependency=true and remove the reference
>> to the bean-validation-core feature. Not sure if this is a good idea in
>> 3.1.x as it is slightly incompatible.
>>
>> I am -1 of adding a bval feature to CXF. Instead let us create the feature
>> either in karaf or directly provided by bval which I think would be the
>> best option. I offer my help in doing so.
>>
>> Christian
>>
>> 2015-12-14 13:37 GMT+01:00 Francesco Chicchiriccò <il...@apache.org>:
>>
>>> On 14/12/2015 13:34, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
>>>
>>>> 2015-12-14 13:17 GMT+01:00 Francesco Chicchiriccò <il...@apache.org>:
>>>>
>>>> On 14/12/2015 12:59, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> 2015-12-14 12:45 GMT+01:00 Sergey Beryozkin <sb...@gmail.com>:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Benson
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 11/12/15 16:19, Benson Margulies wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CXF-6706
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CXF-6705
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The changes I've committed for CXF-6705 make it possible to use bean
>>>>>>>> validation, but ...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 1: only with hibernate
>>>>>>>> 2: only with extra code to obtain the validation provider.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> This raises two questions.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 1: should I restructure the features to split
>>>>>>>> 'cxf-bean-validation-hibernate' from 'cxf-bean-validation', leaving
>>>>>>>> room for bval?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Please, I've heard Apache BVal is less complete, but I think we should
>>>>>>> keep the option open for users who would like to experiment with this
>>>>>>> Apache project
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi guys, happy to help fixing any gap there if you need. BVal passes
>>>>>> TCKs
>>>>>> so IMO it is a valid option.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Romain,
>>>>> AFAICT, current BVal release (2012!) passes the TCK for JSR-303 (e.g.
>>>>> Bean
>>>>> Validation 1.0), not JSR-349 (e.g. Bean Validation 1.1)
>>>>>
>>>>> http://bval.apache.org/downloads.html
>>>>>
>>>>> Am I wrong?
>>>>>
>>>>> Incidentally, this is the reason why we had to switch from BVal to
>>>>> Hibernate Validator in Syncope, a couple of major releases ago.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/apache/bval/bval-jsr/1.1.0/ passes 1.1
>>>> TCKs (we renamed the main artifact cause naming jsr303 a jsr349 impl was
>>>> odd). Will see if I can update the website - this is one area I didnt work
>>>> on yet.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Oh, that's good to hear, thanks for update.
>>>
>>>
>>> Regards.
>>>
>>> 2: should I put the code in place that actually makes it work, and, if
>>>>>
>>>>>> so, where? I think it would be an additional bundle under 'osgi' that
>>>>>>>> provided a BeanValidationProviderFactory or a
>>>>>>>> ValidationProviderHelper.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I guess the servicemix API spec bundle should help.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi JB, do you think a new BVal spec bundle may need to be released ?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> See https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SMX4-1618, in the
>>>>>>> description,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks, Sergey
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>> --
>>> Francesco Chicchiriccò
>>>
>>> Tirasa - Open Source Excellence
>>> http://www.tirasa.net/
>>>
>>> Involved at The Apache Software Foundation:
>>> member, Syncope PMC chair, Cocoon PMC, Olingo PMC, CXF committer
>>> http://home.apache.org/~ilgrosso/
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> --
>> Christian Schneider
>> http://www.liquid-reality.de
>> <https://owa.talend.com/owa/redir.aspx?C=3aa4083e0c744ae1ba52bd062c5a7e46&URL=http%3a%2f%2fwww.liquid-reality.de>
>>
>> Open Source Architect
>> http://www.talend.com
>> <https://owa.talend.com/owa/redir.aspx?C=3aa4083e0c744ae1ba52bd062c5a7e46&URL=http%3a%2f%2fwww.talend.com>
Re: Fixing up bean validation in OSGi
Posted by Benson Margulies <bi...@gmail.com>.
I've had a PR outstanding at Bval for weeks, with no response to the
email or JIRA. My patch might fix it's current behavior in OSGi for
me, which is to call every bean valid. If any of you can wake the bval
committers up from their, ahem, hibernating state, I would work
further on it. I'm happy to set up dueling hibernate and bval features
in CXF for 3.2.0.
On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 1:38 PM, Christian Schneider
<ch...@die-schneider.net> wrote:
> +1 for making the bean-validation feature independent from hibernate. I
> intended to do this for 3.2 anyway. I propose to just add the
> javax.validation api bundle with dependency=true and remove the reference
> to the bean-validation-core feature. Not sure if this is a good idea in
> 3.1.x as it is slightly incompatible.
>
> I am -1 of adding a bval feature to CXF. Instead let us create the feature
> either in karaf or directly provided by bval which I think would be the
> best option. I offer my help in doing so.
>
> Christian
>
> 2015-12-14 13:37 GMT+01:00 Francesco Chicchiriccò <il...@apache.org>:
>
>> On 14/12/2015 13:34, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
>>
>>> 2015-12-14 13:17 GMT+01:00 Francesco Chicchiriccò <il...@apache.org>:
>>>
>>> On 14/12/2015 12:59, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
>>>>
>>>> 2015-12-14 12:45 GMT+01:00 Sergey Beryozkin <sb...@gmail.com>:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Benson
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 11/12/15 16:19, Benson Margulies wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CXF-6706
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CXF-6705
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The changes I've committed for CXF-6705 make it possible to use bean
>>>>>>> validation, but ...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 1: only with hibernate
>>>>>>> 2: only with extra code to obtain the validation provider.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This raises two questions.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 1: should I restructure the features to split
>>>>>>> 'cxf-bean-validation-hibernate' from 'cxf-bean-validation', leaving
>>>>>>> room for bval?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Please, I've heard Apache BVal is less complete, but I think we should
>>>>>> keep the option open for users who would like to experiment with this
>>>>>> Apache project
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi guys, happy to help fixing any gap there if you need. BVal passes
>>>>> TCKs
>>>>> so IMO it is a valid option.
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Romain,
>>>> AFAICT, current BVal release (2012!) passes the TCK for JSR-303 (e.g.
>>>> Bean
>>>> Validation 1.0), not JSR-349 (e.g. Bean Validation 1.1)
>>>>
>>>> http://bval.apache.org/downloads.html
>>>>
>>>> Am I wrong?
>>>>
>>>> Incidentally, this is the reason why we had to switch from BVal to
>>>> Hibernate Validator in Syncope, a couple of major releases ago.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/apache/bval/bval-jsr/1.1.0/ passes 1.1
>>> TCKs (we renamed the main artifact cause naming jsr303 a jsr349 impl was
>>> odd). Will see if I can update the website - this is one area I didnt work
>>> on yet.
>>>
>>
>> Oh, that's good to hear, thanks for update.
>>
>>
>> Regards.
>>
>> 2: should I put the code in place that actually makes it work, and, if
>>>>
>>>>> so, where? I think it would be an additional bundle under 'osgi' that
>>>>>>> provided a BeanValidationProviderFactory or a
>>>>>>> ValidationProviderHelper.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I guess the servicemix API spec bundle should help.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi JB, do you think a new BVal spec bundle may need to be released ?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> See https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SMX4-1618, in the
>>>>>> description,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks, Sergey
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>> --
>> Francesco Chicchiriccò
>>
>> Tirasa - Open Source Excellence
>> http://www.tirasa.net/
>>
>> Involved at The Apache Software Foundation:
>> member, Syncope PMC chair, Cocoon PMC, Olingo PMC, CXF committer
>> http://home.apache.org/~ilgrosso/
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> --
> Christian Schneider
> http://www.liquid-reality.de
> <https://owa.talend.com/owa/redir.aspx?C=3aa4083e0c744ae1ba52bd062c5a7e46&URL=http%3a%2f%2fwww.liquid-reality.de>
>
> Open Source Architect
> http://www.talend.com
> <https://owa.talend.com/owa/redir.aspx?C=3aa4083e0c744ae1ba52bd062c5a7e46&URL=http%3a%2f%2fwww.talend.com>
Re: Fixing up bean validation in OSGi
Posted by Christian Schneider <ch...@die-schneider.net>.
+1 for making the bean-validation feature independent from hibernate. I
intended to do this for 3.2 anyway. I propose to just add the
javax.validation api bundle with dependency=true and remove the reference
to the bean-validation-core feature. Not sure if this is a good idea in
3.1.x as it is slightly incompatible.
I am -1 of adding a bval feature to CXF. Instead let us create the feature
either in karaf or directly provided by bval which I think would be the
best option. I offer my help in doing so.
Christian
2015-12-14 13:37 GMT+01:00 Francesco Chicchiriccò <il...@apache.org>:
> On 14/12/2015 13:34, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
>
>> 2015-12-14 13:17 GMT+01:00 Francesco Chicchiriccò <il...@apache.org>:
>>
>> On 14/12/2015 12:59, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
>>>
>>> 2015-12-14 12:45 GMT+01:00 Sergey Beryozkin <sb...@gmail.com>:
>>>>
>>>> Hi Benson
>>>>
>>>>> On 11/12/15 16:19, Benson Margulies wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CXF-6706
>>>>>
>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CXF-6705
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The changes I've committed for CXF-6705 make it possible to use bean
>>>>>> validation, but ...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1: only with hibernate
>>>>>> 2: only with extra code to obtain the validation provider.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This raises two questions.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1: should I restructure the features to split
>>>>>> 'cxf-bean-validation-hibernate' from 'cxf-bean-validation', leaving
>>>>>> room for bval?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Please, I've heard Apache BVal is less complete, but I think we should
>>>>> keep the option open for users who would like to experiment with this
>>>>> Apache project
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi guys, happy to help fixing any gap there if you need. BVal passes
>>>> TCKs
>>>> so IMO it is a valid option.
>>>>
>>>> Hi Romain,
>>> AFAICT, current BVal release (2012!) passes the TCK for JSR-303 (e.g.
>>> Bean
>>> Validation 1.0), not JSR-349 (e.g. Bean Validation 1.1)
>>>
>>> http://bval.apache.org/downloads.html
>>>
>>> Am I wrong?
>>>
>>> Incidentally, this is the reason why we had to switch from BVal to
>>> Hibernate Validator in Syncope, a couple of major releases ago.
>>>
>>>
>>> http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/apache/bval/bval-jsr/1.1.0/ passes 1.1
>> TCKs (we renamed the main artifact cause naming jsr303 a jsr349 impl was
>> odd). Will see if I can update the website - this is one area I didnt work
>> on yet.
>>
>
> Oh, that's good to hear, thanks for update.
>
>
> Regards.
>
> 2: should I put the code in place that actually makes it work, and, if
>>>
>>>> so, where? I think it would be an additional bundle under 'osgi' that
>>>>>> provided a BeanValidationProviderFactory or a
>>>>>> ValidationProviderHelper.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I guess the servicemix API spec bundle should help.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi JB, do you think a new BVal spec bundle may need to be released ?
>>>>>
>>>>> See https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SMX4-1618, in the
>>>>> description,
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks, Sergey
>>>>>
>>>>
> --
> Francesco Chicchiriccò
>
> Tirasa - Open Source Excellence
> http://www.tirasa.net/
>
> Involved at The Apache Software Foundation:
> member, Syncope PMC chair, Cocoon PMC, Olingo PMC, CXF committer
> http://home.apache.org/~ilgrosso/
>
>
--
--
Christian Schneider
http://www.liquid-reality.de
<https://owa.talend.com/owa/redir.aspx?C=3aa4083e0c744ae1ba52bd062c5a7e46&URL=http%3a%2f%2fwww.liquid-reality.de>
Open Source Architect
http://www.talend.com
<https://owa.talend.com/owa/redir.aspx?C=3aa4083e0c744ae1ba52bd062c5a7e46&URL=http%3a%2f%2fwww.talend.com>
Re: Fixing up bean validation in OSGi
Posted by Francesco Chicchiriccò <il...@apache.org>.
On 14/12/2015 13:34, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
> 2015-12-14 13:17 GMT+01:00 Francesco Chicchiriccò <il...@apache.org>:
>
>> On 14/12/2015 12:59, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
>>
>>> 2015-12-14 12:45 GMT+01:00 Sergey Beryozkin <sb...@gmail.com>:
>>>
>>> Hi Benson
>>>> On 11/12/15 16:19, Benson Margulies wrote:
>>>>
>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CXF-6706
>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CXF-6705
>>>>>
>>>>> The changes I've committed for CXF-6705 make it possible to use bean
>>>>> validation, but ...
>>>>>
>>>>> 1: only with hibernate
>>>>> 2: only with extra code to obtain the validation provider.
>>>>>
>>>>> This raises two questions.
>>>>>
>>>>> 1: should I restructure the features to split
>>>>> 'cxf-bean-validation-hibernate' from 'cxf-bean-validation', leaving
>>>>> room for bval?
>>>>>
>>>> Please, I've heard Apache BVal is less complete, but I think we should
>>>> keep the option open for users who would like to experiment with this
>>>> Apache project
>>>>
>>> Hi guys, happy to help fixing any gap there if you need. BVal passes TCKs
>>> so IMO it is a valid option.
>>>
>> Hi Romain,
>> AFAICT, current BVal release (2012!) passes the TCK for JSR-303 (e.g. Bean
>> Validation 1.0), not JSR-349 (e.g. Bean Validation 1.1)
>>
>> http://bval.apache.org/downloads.html
>>
>> Am I wrong?
>>
>> Incidentally, this is the reason why we had to switch from BVal to
>> Hibernate Validator in Syncope, a couple of major releases ago.
>>
>>
> http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/apache/bval/bval-jsr/1.1.0/ passes 1.1
> TCKs (we renamed the main artifact cause naming jsr303 a jsr349 impl was
> odd). Will see if I can update the website - this is one area I didnt work
> on yet.
Oh, that's good to hear, thanks for update.
Regards.
>> 2: should I put the code in place that actually makes it work, and, if
>>>>> so, where? I think it would be an additional bundle under 'osgi' that
>>>>> provided a BeanValidationProviderFactory or a
>>>>> ValidationProviderHelper.
>>>>>
>>>>> I guess the servicemix API spec bundle should help.
>>>>>
>>>> Hi JB, do you think a new BVal spec bundle may need to be released ?
>>>>
>>>> See https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SMX4-1618, in the description,
>>>>
>>>> Thanks, Sergey
--
Francesco Chicchiriccò
Tirasa - Open Source Excellence
http://www.tirasa.net/
Involved at The Apache Software Foundation:
member, Syncope PMC chair, Cocoon PMC, Olingo PMC, CXF committer
http://home.apache.org/~ilgrosso/
Re: Fixing up bean validation in OSGi
Posted by Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>.
2015-12-14 13:17 GMT+01:00 Francesco Chicchiriccò <il...@apache.org>:
> On 14/12/2015 12:59, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
>
>> 2015-12-14 12:45 GMT+01:00 Sergey Beryozkin <sb...@gmail.com>:
>>
>> Hi Benson
>>>
>>> On 11/12/15 16:19, Benson Margulies wrote:
>>>
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CXF-6706
>>>>
>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CXF-6705
>>>>
>>>> The changes I've committed for CXF-6705 make it possible to use bean
>>>> validation, but ...
>>>>
>>>> 1: only with hibernate
>>>> 2: only with extra code to obtain the validation provider.
>>>>
>>>> This raises two questions.
>>>>
>>>> 1: should I restructure the features to split
>>>> 'cxf-bean-validation-hibernate' from 'cxf-bean-validation', leaving
>>>> room for bval?
>>>>
>>> Please, I've heard Apache BVal is less complete, but I think we should
>>> keep the option open for users who would like to experiment with this
>>> Apache project
>>>
>> Hi guys, happy to help fixing any gap there if you need. BVal passes TCKs
>> so IMO it is a valid option.
>>
>
> Hi Romain,
> AFAICT, current BVal release (2012!) passes the TCK for JSR-303 (e.g. Bean
> Validation 1.0), not JSR-349 (e.g. Bean Validation 1.1)
>
> http://bval.apache.org/downloads.html
>
> Am I wrong?
>
> Incidentally, this is the reason why we had to switch from BVal to
> Hibernate Validator in Syncope, a couple of major releases ago.
>
>
http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/apache/bval/bval-jsr/1.1.0/ passes 1.1
TCKs (we renamed the main artifact cause naming jsr303 a jsr349 impl was
odd). Will see if I can update the website - this is one area I didnt work
on yet.
> Regards.
>
>
> 2: should I put the code in place that actually makes it work, and, if
>>>> so, where? I think it would be an additional bundle under 'osgi' that
>>>> provided a BeanValidationProviderFactory or a
>>>> ValidationProviderHelper.
>>>>
>>>> I guess the servicemix API spec bundle should help.
>>>>
>>> Hi JB, do you think a new BVal spec bundle may need to be released ?
>>>
>>> See https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SMX4-1618, in the description,
>>>
>>> Thanks, Sergey
>>>
>>
> --
> Francesco Chicchiriccò
>
> Tirasa - Open Source Excellence
> http://www.tirasa.net/
>
> Involved at The Apache Software Foundation:
> member, Syncope PMC chair, Cocoon PMC, Olingo PMC, CXF committer
> http://home.apache.org/~ilgrosso/
>
>
Re: Fixing up bean validation in OSGi
Posted by Francesco Chicchiriccò <il...@apache.org>.
On 14/12/2015 12:59, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
> 2015-12-14 12:45 GMT+01:00 Sergey Beryozkin <sb...@gmail.com>:
>
>> Hi Benson
>>
>> On 11/12/15 16:19, Benson Margulies wrote:
>>
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CXF-6706
>>>
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CXF-6705
>>>
>>> The changes I've committed for CXF-6705 make it possible to use bean
>>> validation, but ...
>>>
>>> 1: only with hibernate
>>> 2: only with extra code to obtain the validation provider.
>>>
>>> This raises two questions.
>>>
>>> 1: should I restructure the features to split
>>> 'cxf-bean-validation-hibernate' from 'cxf-bean-validation', leaving
>>> room for bval?
>> Please, I've heard Apache BVal is less complete, but I think we should
>> keep the option open for users who would like to experiment with this
>> Apache project
> Hi guys, happy to help fixing any gap there if you need. BVal passes TCKs
> so IMO it is a valid option.
Hi Romain,
AFAICT, current BVal release (2012!) passes the TCK for JSR-303 (e.g.
Bean Validation 1.0), not JSR-349 (e.g. Bean Validation 1.1)
http://bval.apache.org/downloads.html
Am I wrong?
Incidentally, this is the reason why we had to switch from BVal to
Hibernate Validator in Syncope, a couple of major releases ago.
Regards.
>>> 2: should I put the code in place that actually makes it work, and, if
>>> so, where? I think it would be an additional bundle under 'osgi' that
>>> provided a BeanValidationProviderFactory or a
>>> ValidationProviderHelper.
>>>
>>> I guess the servicemix API spec bundle should help.
>> Hi JB, do you think a new BVal spec bundle may need to be released ?
>>
>> See https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SMX4-1618, in the description,
>>
>> Thanks, Sergey
--
Francesco Chicchiriccò
Tirasa - Open Source Excellence
http://www.tirasa.net/
Involved at The Apache Software Foundation:
member, Syncope PMC chair, Cocoon PMC, Olingo PMC, CXF committer
http://home.apache.org/~ilgrosso/
Re: Fixing up bean validation in OSGi
Posted by Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>.
2015-12-14 12:45 GMT+01:00 Sergey Beryozkin <sb...@gmail.com>:
> Hi Benson
>
> On 11/12/15 16:19, Benson Margulies wrote:
>
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CXF-6706
>>
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CXF-6705
>>
>> The changes I've committed for CXF-6705 make it possible to use bean
>> validation, but ...
>>
>> 1: only with hibernate
>> 2: only with extra code to obtain the validation provider.
>>
>> This raises two questions.
>>
>> 1: should I restructure the features to split
>> 'cxf-bean-validation-hibernate' from 'cxf-bean-validation', leaving
>> room for bval?
>>
>
> Please, I've heard Apache BVal is less complete, but I think we should
> keep the option open for users who would like to experiment with this
> Apache project
>
>
Hi guys, happy to help fixing any gap there if you need. BVal passes TCKs
so IMO it is a valid option.
>
>> 2: should I put the code in place that actually makes it work, and, if
>> so, where? I think it would be an additional bundle under 'osgi' that
>> provided a BeanValidationProviderFactory or a
>> ValidationProviderHelper.
>>
>> I guess the servicemix API spec bundle should help.
> Hi JB, do you think a new BVal spec bundle may need to be released ?
>
> See https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SMX4-1618, in the description,
>
> Thanks, Sergey
>
Re: Fixing up bean validation in OSGi
Posted by Sergey Beryozkin <sb...@gmail.com>.
Hi Benson
On 11/12/15 16:19, Benson Margulies wrote:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CXF-6706
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CXF-6705
>
> The changes I've committed for CXF-6705 make it possible to use bean
> validation, but ...
>
> 1: only with hibernate
> 2: only with extra code to obtain the validation provider.
>
> This raises two questions.
>
> 1: should I restructure the features to split
> 'cxf-bean-validation-hibernate' from 'cxf-bean-validation', leaving
> room for bval?
Please, I've heard Apache BVal is less complete, but I think we should
keep the option open for users who would like to experiment with this
Apache project
>
> 2: should I put the code in place that actually makes it work, and, if
> so, where? I think it would be an additional bundle under 'osgi' that
> provided a BeanValidationProviderFactory or a
> ValidationProviderHelper.
>
I guess the servicemix API spec bundle should help.
Hi JB, do you think a new BVal spec bundle may need to be released ?
See https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SMX4-1618, in the description,
Thanks, Sergey