bval-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Matt Benson <gudnabr...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Location of validation.xml
Date Thu, 20 Mar 2014 18:28:27 GMT
Hmm, I would have assumed the container was responsible for bootstrapping
CDI per deployment context (ear, war) and that the BValExtension and its
contributions would therefore likewise be contextual as a matter of course.

Matt
On Mar 20, 2014 1:23 PM, "Romain Manni-Bucau" <rmannibucau@gmail.com> wrote:

> no since Bval doesn't handle ear and contextual validator. That's why
> containers will provide Validator and Validator CDI beans
> 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 19:21 GMT+01:00 Matt Benson <gudnabrsam@gmail.com>:
> > On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 1:19 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau
> > <rmannibucau@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> 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.
> >
> > Hmm, but the spec says "In a Java EE container, a Bean Validation
> > provider must integrate with CDI." To my understanding, that puts the
> > onus not on the container but on BVal.
> >
> > Matt
> >
> >> 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
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message