bval-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibu...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Location of validation.xml
Date Thu, 20 Mar 2014 18:19:09 GMT
well WEB-INF read is done before container instantiate anything. Then
the link with CDI is done through an interceptor and the container is
responsible to provide Validator and ValidatorFactory (BVal provides
default ONLY if not already in CDI context) so I don't see any issue.
Romain Manni-Bucau
Twitter: @rmannibucau
Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau



2014-03-20 19:10 GMT+01:00 Michael Blyakher <michael.blyakher@gmail.com>:
> My guess is that TomEE was able to use the Configuration API to build the
> config from validation.xml and then pass control off to BVal, which worked
> fine in 1.0 because there it was simple loading/instantiating the classes
> required. Now with 1.1, the CDI integration requires that the custom
> components be created as CDI managed beans, which means that pattern is no
> longer valid unless the EE container handles the CDI extension separately
> from what is already bundled with BVal 1.1. Or in other words, the EE
> container cannot utilize and integrate the CDI code already present in BVal
> and must do it on it's own all so that it can handle the
> WEB-INF/validation.xml location. At this point it sort of an either you can
> handle WEB-INF/validation.xml OR you can have CDI integration out of the box
> (ish).
>
> As I've tried to explain, this was not previously an issue before trying to
> integrate BVal 1.1 into an EE7 app server.
>
> Hope that helps,
> Mike
>
>
> On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 1:01 PM, Matt Benson <gudnabrsam@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> I'm still not seeing how TomEE does or will handle
>> WEB-INF/validation.xml . We may have to agree to disagree here until
>> we have some concrete code to look at.
>>
>> Matt
>>
>> On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 12:52 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau
>> <rmannibucau@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > In a EE container the container is responsible of more than it and in
>> > "more" there is enough to not bother BVal impl with anything more than
>> > what is today. You could say the same for EE 6 since it was already
>> > the case. If you check tomee impl nothing could have helped.
>> > Romain Manni-Bucau
>> > Twitter: @rmannibucau
>> > Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
>> > LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
>> > Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > 2014-03-20 18:27 GMT+01:00 Matt Benson <gudnabrsam@gmail.com>:
>> >> I had a bit of trouble parsing that, Romain, but you mentioned using
>> >> META-INF/validation.xml. EE spec says a webapp uses
>> >> WEB-INF/validation.xml . BVal should allow the EE container to make
>> >> that happen, else how can it be used in a compliant EE container?
>> >>
>> >> Matt
>> >>
>> >> On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 12:19 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau
>> >> <rmannibucau@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>> me too and both are done.
>> >>>
>> >>> When hacked 1.1 impl I added all what was needed for tomee so it
>> >>> should be fine.
>> >>>
>> >>> about 1.: Bval only handle JSE spec so that's fine, 2. it works for
>> >>> user, even if users brings CDI = BVal he will then use
>> >>> META6INF/validation.xml and it will be ok.
>> >>>
>> >>> The only solution would be to use a @WebListener but it would conflict
>> >>> with CDI lifecycle in 'custom home made CDI-BVal-EElike server' so I
>> >>> really want to avoid this kind of solution.
>> >>>
>> >>> So I think it is fine today.
>> >>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> >>> Twitter: @rmannibucau
>> >>> Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
>> >>> LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
>> >>> Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> 2014-03-20 18:15 GMT+01:00 Matt Benson <gudnabrsam@gmail.com>:
>> >>>> But TomEE isn't using BVal 1.1 yet, is it, so how can we say it's
>> >>>> handled? I haven't looked at what Hibernate Validator does. I only
>> >>>> care to implement 1. the spec and 2. what works for users.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Matt
>> >>>>
>> >>>> On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 12:07 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau
>> >>>> <rmannibucau@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>>>> that's not an issue if not in a EE container. Let think to tomcat +
>> >>>>> bval there -> not cdi aware so not an issue. In TomEE, WAS, JBoss it
>> >>>>> is handled so I don't see any issue here and would like to avoid
>> >>>>> BVal
>> >>>>> to do so much that it will break some containers and make their
>> >>>>> behavior weird.
>> >>>>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> >>>>> Twitter: @rmannibucau
>> >>>>> Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
>> >>>>> LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
>> >>>>> Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> 2014-03-20 17:53 GMT+01:00 Matt Benson <gudnabrsam@gmail.com>:
>> >>>>>> By way of example. let's say the application developer includes
>> >>>>>> WEB-INF/validation.xml with
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> <message-interpolator>com.acme.bv.CustomMessageInterpolator</message-interpolator>,
>> >>>>>> the spec says the ValidatorFactory must be configured with a CDI
>> >>>>>> managed bean representing this class (presumably only if there is
>> >>>>>> such
>> >>>>>> a managed bean available; otherwise I suppose we'd fall back to
>> >>>>>> non-CDI instantiation behavior). If the BValExtension isn't aware
>> >>>>>> of
>> >>>>>> the user's configuration, this can't happen.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Matt
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 11:43 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau
>> >>>>>> <rmannibucau@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>>>>>> excepted the cdi integration is done through an interceptor
>> >>>>>>> getting
>> >>>>>>> Validator injected so it still works, ot I didn't get the failing
>> >>>>>>> case
>> >>>>>>> (possible ;)
>> >>>>>>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> >>>>>>> Twitter: @rmannibucau
>> >>>>>>> Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
>> >>>>>>> LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
>> >>>>>>> Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> 2014-03-20 17:43 GMT+01:00 Matt Benson <gudnabrsam@gmail.com>:
>> >>>>>>>> Well, take the existing BValExtension code. When the extension is
>> >>>>>>>> constructed, it calls Validation.byDefaultProvider().configure().
>> >>>>>>>> It
>> >>>>>>>> never has a chance to learn about WEB-INF/validation.xml, and I'm
>> >>>>>>>> having a very hard time believing that we're supposed to ignore
>> >>>>>>>> it
>> >>>>>>>> completely, and that when a user decides (not unreasonably) to
>> >>>>>>>> use
>> >>>>>>>> this location as specified in the EE spec, that the CDI support
>> >>>>>>>> we
>> >>>>>>>> provide is completely unaware of their custom validation
>> >>>>>>>> configuration. It would violate principle of least surprise in
>> >>>>>>>> quite a
>> >>>>>>>> flagrant manner. This seems to run us all the way back to the SPI
>> >>>>>>>> approach where BVal has to discover for itself where to pull
>> >>>>>>>> validation.xml ! :P
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> Matt
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 11:34 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau
>> >>>>>>>> <rmannibucau@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>> BV is not EE aware so that's not a big deal. It works fine in
>> >>>>>>>>> META-INF
>> >>>>>>>>> and in WEB-INF for EE case when the container handles it.
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> Not sure I see the issue.
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> That's the integration work of EE and not of BVal IMO.
>> >>>>>>>>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> >>>>>>>>> Twitter: @rmannibucau
>> >>>>>>>>> Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
>> >>>>>>>>> LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
>> >>>>>>>>> Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> 2014-03-20 17:31 GMT+01:00 Matt Benson <gudnabrsam@gmail.com>:
>> >>>>>>>>>> But this goes back to the problem that the EE spec says to pull
>> >>>>>>>>>> validation.xml from WEB-INF. Since the BV spec doesn't make any
>> >>>>>>>>>> mention of WEB-INF/validation.xml it does imply that we could
>> >>>>>>>>>> never
>> >>>>>>>>>> handle CDI as defined by the spec, because we wouldn't be able
>> >>>>>>>>>> to make
>> >>>>>>>>>> the determination whether, e.g., any custom
>> >>>>>>>>>> ConstraintValidatorFactory
>> >>>>>>>>>> was specified. Since the spec clearly says we *do* have to
>> >>>>>>>>>> integrate
>> >>>>>>>>>> w/ CDI in an EE container, we may IMO surmise that we have to
>> >>>>>>>>>> attempt
>> >>>>>>>>>> to implement the *intent* of the spec since we clearly can't
>> >>>>>>>>>> follow
>> >>>>>>>>>> the *letter* of the spec. Does that make sense? This seems to
>> >>>>>>>>>> put us
>> >>>>>>>>>> back to the need for a container to either specify some handle
>> >>>>>>>>>> to read
>> >>>>>>>>>> the validation configuration, or else the unmarshaled
>> >>>>>>>>>> ValidationConfigType object, due to the difference between the
>> >>>>>>>>>> *classname* as supplied by the validation config vs. the
>> >>>>>>>>>> *instance* as
>> >>>>>>>>>> would be supplied by the Configuration bootstrap methods.
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> Matt
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 11:10 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau
>> >>>>>>>>>> <rmannibucau@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>>> to provide its own validator and validatorfactory for sure
>> >>>>>>>>>>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> >>>>>>>>>>> Twitter: @rmannibucau
>> >>>>>>>>>>> Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
>> >>>>>>>>>>> LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
>> >>>>>>>>>>> Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>> 2014-03-20 17:07 GMT+01:00 Michael Blyakher
>> >>>>>>>>>>> <michael.blyakher@gmail.com>:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure I followed that last comment. Are you implying
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> that an EE
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> container needs to implement it's own CDI extension (or
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> through other
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> means) and not use the native bval support to get this
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> integrated CDI
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> behavior?
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 10:58 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> <rmannibucau@gmail.com>wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> if not existing and provided by the EE container which will
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> be the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> case for sure.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Twitter: @rmannibucau
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 2014-03-20 16:52 GMT+01:00 Michael Blyakher
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> <michael.blyakher@gmail.com>:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> > Unless I am mistaken, when bval creates the configured
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> > components from
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> > validation.xml (MessageInterpolator,
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> > ParameterNameProvider, etc...), it
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> > uses BValExtension#inject which creates these components
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> > as CDI managed
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> > beans. That is what I would be loosing by
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> > loading/instantiating these
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> > classes without delegating to bval to do it.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> > On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 10:20 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> > <rmannibucau@gmail.com>wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> not sure I follow, while @Inject Validator works it is
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> fine.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> Twitter: @rmannibucau
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> 2014-03-20 16:17 GMT+01:00 Michael Blyakher
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> <michael.blyakher@gmail.com
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > So doing that means I will be loosing all of the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > integration that bval
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> does
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > with CDI. Does that mean I need to do the CDI pieces
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > outside of this
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> bval
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > implementation? That has been my whole driver for this
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > discussion...
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 10:12 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > <rmannibucau@gmail.com>wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> Yes, basically use your own representation of
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> validation.xml and
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> create the Configuration respecting what is in
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> validation.xml (kind
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> of
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> custom to bval conversion). That's what we do (and
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> we'll do) in tomee
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> validationbuilder
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> Twitter: @rmannibucau
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> 2014-03-20 15:50 GMT+01:00 Michael Blyakher <
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> michael.blyakher@gmail.com
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> > Providing a Configuration<?> implies that I am
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> > loading the classes
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> from
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> > validation.xml myself. This circumvents the bval
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> > instantiation and
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> > integration of CDI if it is available, no?
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> > On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 9:35 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> > <rmannibucau@gmail.com>wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> Providing a Configuration<?> impl bval will get all
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> it needs to
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> execute. For executable stuff there is a property
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> you can add but
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> not
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> sure it will be needed for you.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> Twitter: @rmannibucau
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> 2014-03-20 15:22 GMT+01:00 Michael Blyakher <
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> michael.blyakher@gmail.com
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> > Romain - I don't quite understand what you mean
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> > by using
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> > ConfigurationImpl.java is enough. I'm not finding
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> > that I can do
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> what I
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> > described with it. Can you elaborate on what you
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> > mean?
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> > On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 12:56 AM, Romain
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> > Manni-Bucau
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> > <rmannibucau@gmail.com>wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> Guys it is not needed normally and using
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/bval/branches/bval-11/bval-jsr/src/main/java/org/apache/bval/jsr/ConfigurationImpl.javais
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> enough
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> Le 19 mars 2014 23:47, "Matt Benson"
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> <gudnabrsam@gmail.com> a
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> écrit
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> :
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > No, but if you would file a JIRA issue it'd
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > make us feel
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> popular.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> ;)
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > Thanks,
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > Matt
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 5:44 PM, Michael
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > Blyakher
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > <michael.blyakher@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > > Right after sending of my last email I
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > > started wondering
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> this
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> approach
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> of
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > > picking off the mappings in
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > > ValidationConfigType and
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> calling
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > #addMapping()
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > > would solve my problem and I'm pretty sure
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > > that it will.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Glad
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> we
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> got to
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > > same solution!
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > > Is there something tracking this work
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > > already that I can
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> follow?
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > > On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 5:36 PM, Matt Benson
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > > <
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> gudnabrsam@gmail.com>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> Well, I haven't yet seen anything that
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> tells me that it
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> would be
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> correct for a mapping found in
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> WEB-INF/validation.xml to
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> be
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> resolved
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> from the ServletContext as opposed to the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> classpath, but
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> since
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> in
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> an
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> EE server the BV impl (here BVal) would
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> live "above" the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> application
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> code there's a problem regardless in having
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> BVal load the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> mapping
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> resources, I think, because it won't have
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> awareness of a
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> given
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> webapp's classloader.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> However, using Romain's approach of having
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> the actual
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> parsed
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> JAXB
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> ValidationConfigType object be passed to
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> BVal would seem
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> to
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> take
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> care
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> of your issue: the EE server could use JAXB
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> to produce
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> this
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> from
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> WEB-INF/validation.xml, then pick off the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> mapping
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> elements,
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> provide
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> the modified ValidationConfigType object to
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> the BV
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> bootstrapping,
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> and
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> call #addMapping() for the app-specific
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> resource streams.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> How
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> does
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> that sound?
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> Matt
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 5:25 PM, Michael
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> Blyakher
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> <michael.blyakher@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > From an application perspective I
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > understand that
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> regardless
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> how
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > ValidatorFactory is built there would
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > never be a desire
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> to
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> ignore
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > mappings
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > files specified in validation.xml. The
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > application
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> already
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> knows
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> what
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > it
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > wants and therefor anything specified
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > should be used
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> from
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> both
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> ways
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> to
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > specify mappings.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > In an EE app server environment, the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > server needs to
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> make
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > Validator/ValidatorFactory for each
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > module available
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> through
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> injection
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > or
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > lookup. This means the app server is
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > bootstrapping the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > ValidatorFactory
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > itself, using the module deployment
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > descriptors
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> (validation.xml)
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> to
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > create
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > it before passing it back to the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > application. With this
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> in
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> mind,
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > app
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > server needs to be able to direct bval to
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > specify that
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> location
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> of
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > validation.xml will be under WEB-INF for
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > a web module
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> (if
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> it
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> was
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > included
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > by the app developer). As we discussed
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > earlier, bval
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> doesn't
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> handle
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > this.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > Taking a step back to 1.0 this wasn't an
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > issue, because
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> as
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> long
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> as
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > EE
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > app server could handle parsing
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > validation.xml since it
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> knows
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > where/how
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > to
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > find it and programatically bootstrap the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Configuration, it
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> could
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> then
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > call
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > ignoreXMLConfiguration and nothing would
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > be lost. Now
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> with
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> 1.1,
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> all
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > CDI
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > integration bval does is lost if the EE
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > app server
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> follows
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> this
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > pattern.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > Thus, to utilize the CDI integration
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > piece, bval needs
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> to
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> create
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> all
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > of
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > configuration components, but that also
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > means that it
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> needs to
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> parse
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > validation.xml (or have it be provided to
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > it).
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > Now, if something (method TBD) was done
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > to find
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> WEB-INF/validation.xml
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > by
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > bval, how then would it go about trying
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > to find the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> mapping
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> files?
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > This
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > is
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > done the same way that validation.xml was
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > looked for
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> originally
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> before
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > this
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > workaround/solution, which gets us into
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > the same
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> situation
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> where
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> we
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > couldn't find WEB-INF/validation.xml if
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > the mapping
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> file is
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > WEB-INF/my-mapping.xml (I'm curious where
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > the spec
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> indicates
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> that
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> this
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > location isn't compliant).
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > So in short, it's not that I want to be
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > able to ignore
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> mappings
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > altogether.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > I was just thinking that if WEB-INF is a
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > valid location
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> for
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > mapping
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > file to live, bval won't be able to find
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > it either, so
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> even
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> if a
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > workaround
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > is provided for finding validation.xml,
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > any mappings
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> specified in
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> xml
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > will
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > not be found either. The idea of being
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > able to
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> programatically
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> specify
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > that
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > xml mappings should be ignored is so that
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > the EE app
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> server
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> could
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > convert
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > them into InputStream's and then somehow
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > indicate to
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> bval
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> that it
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > doesn't
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > need to do anything with the xml anymore.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > Hopefully all of that rambling makes
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > sense and clarifies
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> problem
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > I'm
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > butting into :)
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 4:28 PM, Romain
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > Manni-Bucau
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> > <rmannibucau@gmail.com>wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> I think mapping in web-inf is not spec
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> compliant
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> That said calling ignoreXmlConfig you
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> can already do
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> what
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> you
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> want
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> Finally i think the spi or assimilated
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> is useless and
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> using
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> api +
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> maybe
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> few custom properties should be enough
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> so i wouldnt
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> add it
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> before
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> it
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> sould
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> be mandatory. It generally breaks the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> framework which
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> is
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> not
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> enough
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> tested
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> then.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> Le 19 mars 2014 22:04, "Michael
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> Blyakher" <
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > michael.blyakher@gmail.com>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> a
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> écrit :
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > I'm prototyping the development
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > efforts for pulling
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> in
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> 1.1
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > implementation into an EE app server,
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > so I need be
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> able
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> to
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> press
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> right
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > buttons on bval so that it is able to
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > handle both the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> mappings
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > files
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > and
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > validation.xml. (I won't be able to
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > control how an
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> application
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > specifies
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > it's mappings, but I need to ensure
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > that specifying
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> them in
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> xml
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > under
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > WEB-INF works)
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > My concern was that I was going to run
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > into the same
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> issues
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> loading
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > mappings files as with validation.xml
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > from WEB-INF
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> unless
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > proposed
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > change somehow provided a way to tell
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > bval to skip
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> using
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > mappings
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> found
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > in the provided parsed validation.xml
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > and only use
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> those
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> provided
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > by
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > calling Configuration#addMapping().
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > Otherwise I would
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> call
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > Configuration#addMapping(), but bval
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > would still try
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> to
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> find
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > mappings
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > resources itself and fail to do so.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > Does that make
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> sense?
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 12:32 PM, Matt
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > Benson <
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > gudnabrsam@gmail.com>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > XML constraint mapping files are
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > separate from xml
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> validation
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > config.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > So you either provide them via
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> Configuration#addMapping()
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> or in
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > your
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > validation.xml (or whatever you
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > override with).
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > >
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > Matt
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > >
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 11:39 AM,
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > Michael Blyakher
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > <michael.blyakher@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > > So if I understand this latest
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > > proposal
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> correctly,
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> any
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > > bootstrapper
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> (EE
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > > servers specifically) will be able
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > > to provide the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> parsed
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> validation.xml
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > > configuration to the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> ApacheValidatorConfiguration?
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > > If so, how will this work with the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > > mappings
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> config
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> files?
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> If
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > for
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > example
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > I
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > > have my constraints defined in
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> WEB-INF/my-mappings.xml,
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> while
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > bootstrapping
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > > will I still be able to set the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > > InputStream for
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> that
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> file
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > without
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> bval
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > > trying to do it as well (and not
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > > finding this
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> resource
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> at
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> this
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > location)?
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > > Previously this could be
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > > accomplished by
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> specifying
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > > Configuration.ignoreXMLConfiguration, but I don't
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> quite
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> see
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> how
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > > that
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > would
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > > work in this case.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > > Thanks,
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > > Mike
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > > On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 11:11 AM,
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > > Romain
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> Manni-Bucau <
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > rmannibucau@gmail.com>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > > wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> Well if we can avoid to
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> fork/branch tomee before
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> next
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> release
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> would
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> be
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> awesome but yes it sonds
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> reasonable and avoiding
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> jvm
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> SPI
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> is
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> awesome
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> Twitter: @rmannibucau
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> Blog:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> LinkedIn:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> Github:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> 2014-03-19 17:10 GMT+01:00 Matt
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> Benson <
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> gudnabrsam@gmail.com
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> > Actually, come to think of it,
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> > we don't have
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> to
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> do
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> it
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> as a
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > "services"
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> > SPI at all; we can just define
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> > the interface
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> and
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> have
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> it
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> be
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > a
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> custom
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> > config item for
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> > ApacheValidatorConfiguration.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> This
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> makes
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> it
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> > more
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> > explicit and TomEE can just
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> > specify when
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> > bootstrapping--hopefully,
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> > anyway. We'll see if there are
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> > any gotchas and
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> hopefully
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> we
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> > can
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> get
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > it
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> > working in a TomEE branch or
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> > fork before we
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> set
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> it
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> in
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> stone.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> > Okay?
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> > Matt
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> > On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 11:06
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> > AM, Matt Benson
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> <
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> gudnabrsam@gmail.com
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > >
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> > wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> Well, in that case I don't see
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> how we can
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> really go
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> wrong
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> there.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > I'll
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> try to remember to do this as
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> I'm hacking
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> BVal
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> in
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > coming
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> weeks
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > and
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> maybe we can then see how it
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> looks in TomEE.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> Matt
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 11:00
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> AM, Romain
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> Manni-Bucau
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> <rmannibucau@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>> that's what I was thinking
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>> about but when I
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> hacked
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> 1.1
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>> branch I
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > was
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>> really thinking adding it
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>> when integrating
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> tomee
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> to
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> avoid
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > a
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > useless
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > or
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>> wrong SPI.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>> Twitter: @rmannibucau
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>> Blog:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>> LinkedIn:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>> Github:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>> 2014-03-19 16:59 GMT+01:00
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>> Matt Benson
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>> <gudnabrsam@gmail.com>:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>> So are you proposing the SPI
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>> look more
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> like:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>> public interface
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> DefaultValidationConfigProvider
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> {
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> org.apache.bval.jsr.xml.ValidationConfigType
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>> getDefaultValidationConfig();
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>> }
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>> ?
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>> Matt
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>> On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>> 10:57 AM, Romain
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> Manni-Bucau
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>> <rmannibucau@gmail.com>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>> Cause:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>> 1) TomEE added some
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>> features relying on
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> internal
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> config
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>> (placeholders etc)
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>> 2) TomEE uses its own model
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>> for all EE
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> descriptors
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>> whatever
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > spec
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>> is
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>> That's not an issue on BVal
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>> side but it
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> will
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> need
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> to
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> be
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > integrated
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>> without forking as much as
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>> possible
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>> Twitter: @rmannibucau
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>> Blog:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>> LinkedIn:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>> Github:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>> 2014-03-19 16:52 GMT+01:00
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>> Matt Benson
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>> <gudnabrsam@gmail.com
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>> Why can't TomEE rely on
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>> BVal for
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> parsing? We
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> should
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>> devise
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>> something
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>> as simple as possible,
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>> whatever the case.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>> Matt
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>> On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>> 10:45 AM, Romain
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> Manni-Bucau
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>> <rmannibucau@gmail.com>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>> well this way we'll need
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>> another spi for
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> TomEE
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> which
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>> can't
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > rely
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > on
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>> BVal for parsing. That's
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>> why I thought
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> sending
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>> parsing
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > result
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>> BTW any urgence on it?
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>> Twitter: @rmannibucau
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>> Blog:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>> LinkedIn:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>> Github:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>> 2014-03-19 16:43
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>> GMT+01:00 Matt Benson
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>> <mbenson@apache.org
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>> I was thinking along the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>> lines Michael
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> says.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> e.g.:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>> public interface
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > DefaultValidationConfigurationProvider
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>> {
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>   InputStream
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> getDefaultValidationConfiguration();
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>> }
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>> Then we use
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>> ServiceLoader (functional
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> equivalent
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> for
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>> BVal
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > 1.0,
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>> Java 5)
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>> to find any available
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>> implementations.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> If
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> none
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> found,
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>> we
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> fall
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>> back to:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>> class
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> StandardDefaultValidationConfigurationProvider
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > implements
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>> DefaultValidationConfigurationProvider
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> {
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>   final Properties
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>> properties;
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > StandardDefaultValidationConfigurationProvider(Properties
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>> properties) {
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>     this.properties =
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>> properties;
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>   }
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>   public InputStream
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>> getDefaultValidationConfiguration() {
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>     // look for property
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>> pointing to
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> custom
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> resource,
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>> else
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>> META-INF/validation.xml
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>     // ensure only one
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>> such resource
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>     // return
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> getResourceAsStream(resourceName)
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>   }
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>> }
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>> This way TomEE would
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>> simply have to
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> provide:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> WebApplicationDefaultValidationConfigurationProvider
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > implements
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>> DefaultValidationConfigurationProvider
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> {
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>   public InputStream
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>> getDefaultValidationConfiguration() {
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>     return
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > >
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> getServletContext().getResourceAsStream("WEB-INF/validation.xml");
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>   }
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>   private static
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>> ServletContext
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> getServletContext() {
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>     // TBD
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>   }
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>> }
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>> Matt
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>> 10:28 AM,
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Romain
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> Manni-Bucau
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>> <rmannibucau@gmail.com>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>> Actually I'd expect the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>> SPI to give
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> processed
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>> instance
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > and
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>> not the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>> location. That's why i
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>> sugegsted to
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> wait
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> a
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> bit
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> for
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > it
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>> to
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> see
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>> real
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>> need.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>> Twitter: @rmannibucau
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>> Blog:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>> LinkedIn:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>> Github:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>> 2014-03-19 16:10
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>> GMT+01:00 Michael
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> Blyakher
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>> <michael.blyakher@gmail.com>:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>> How would an SPI like
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>> this work?
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Would
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> it
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> allow
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>> EE
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > server
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>> to specify
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>> the location of the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>> validation.xml
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> (maybe
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> in
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > form
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>> of
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> an
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>> InputStream)?
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Mar 18, 2014
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>> at 1:59 PM,
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Romain
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> Manni-Bucau
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>> <rmannibucau@gmail.com>wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> tomee parses it
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> itself and then
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> create
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> configuration
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> itself. I
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> think we can wait
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> tomee starts
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> javaee7
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> to
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> write
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> it
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> since
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > it
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> should be
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> very soon (when next
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> release is
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> done)
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> and
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> it
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> would
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> be
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > main
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> and
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> more demanding user.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> Twitter: @rmannibucau
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> Blog:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> LinkedIn:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> Github:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> 2014-03-18 19:42
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> GMT+01:00 Matt
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Benson
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> <
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > mbenson@apache.org
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> > On Tue, Mar 18,
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> > 2014 at 1:01 PM,
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> Michael
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > Blyakher
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> > <michael.blyakher@gmail.com>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >> Hi All,
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >> Thanks for the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >> quick replies, and
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> apologies
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> for
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >> not
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > being
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >> more specific
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> - I
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >> was quoting the EE
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >> 7 Platform
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> spec
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> as
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> I am
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> particularly
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >> interested in
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> using
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >> the bval 1.1
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >> implementation that
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> hasn't
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> been
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> officially
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >> released yet.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >> But from what I am
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >> hearing, it is
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >> responsibility
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> of
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > an
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >> EE server to
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >> handle the WEB-INF
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >> case. I can
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> see
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> how
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> this
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> is
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> possible
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > for
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >> the 1.0
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >> implementation, as
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >> the server can
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> parse
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > validation.xml
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >> itself and
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >> bootstrap the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >> configuration
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> through
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >> validation
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> spec
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >> API's. How would
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >> this be done for
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >> the current 1.1
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> implementation
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >> in
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >> bval-1.1 branch
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> in
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >> the repository? I
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >> don't see how
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> values
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> for
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >> the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> "executable-validation"
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >> element could be
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >> provided to the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> impl
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> through
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >> validation spec
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >> API's.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> > Well, the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > >
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> http://bval.apache.org/mvnsite/bval-jsr303/apidocs/org/apache/bval/jsr303/ApacheValidatorConfiguration.Properties.html#VALIDATION_XML_PATH
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> > property can be
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> > used to point to a
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> different
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> > resource
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> on
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> > classpath, but I
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> > can't find any
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> mechanism
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> that
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> > could
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> be
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > used
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> > to hook
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> > up
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> > WEB-INF/validation.xml, and I
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> can't
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> find
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> how
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> > TomEE
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > does
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> > it, so
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> > AFAICT you have
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> > indeed found what
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> consider a
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> problem.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > Off
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> > the top of
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> > my head I think we
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> > could solve it
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> by
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> adding a
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> > simple
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> SPI
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > to
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> > discover
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> > the default
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> > validation
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> configuration
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> resource.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> Thoughts?
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> > Matt
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >> Thanks,
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >> Michael
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >> On Tue, Mar 18,
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >> 2014 at 12:13 PM,
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> Romain
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >> Manni-Bucau
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >> <rmannibucau@gmail.com>wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >>> Hi
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >>> Bval only looks
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >>> in META-INF but
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> TomEE
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> for
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >>> instance
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > (more
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >>> generally EE
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >>> servers) handles
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >>> WEB-INF case.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >>> Romain
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >>> Manni-Bucau
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >>> Twitter:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >>> @rmannibucau
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >>> Blog:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >>> LinkedIn:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >>> Github:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >>> 2014-03-18 17:50
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >>> GMT+01:00
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Michael
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> Blyakher
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> <
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> michael.blyakher@gmail.com>:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >>> > Hi,
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >>> >
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >>> > Where is the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >>> > validation.xml
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> supposed
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> to be
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > for
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >>> > a
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> web
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >>> > archive? The
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> bval
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >>> > spec's only
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >>> > indicate the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >>> >
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >>> > "META-INF/validation.xml"
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >>> > location, but
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >>> > the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> EE
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >>> > platform spec
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >>> > indicates that
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> for
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> a
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> web
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > archive
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> this
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >>> > location must
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >>> > be
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >>> >
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >>> > "WEB-INF/validation.xml".
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >>> >
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >>> > EE.5.17 - "The
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >>> > name of the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> descriptor
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> is
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >>> >
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >>> > WEB-INF/validation.xml for
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> web
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >>> > modules and
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> META-INF/validation.xml
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> for
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> all
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >>> > other
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > types
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >>> > of modules."
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >>> >
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >>> > Given this, I
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >>> > don't see
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> anywhere
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> in
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> bval
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >>> > 1.0
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> or
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > 1.1
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >>> > code that
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> handles
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >>> > this. Am I
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >>> > missing something
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> or
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> does
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> this
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > implementation
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >>> > not handle
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> this
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >>> > case for web
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >>> > archives?
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >>> >
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >>> > Thanks,
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >>> > Michael
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > > >
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > >
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >> >>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> > >
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >> >>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> >>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>

Mime
View raw message