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 <gudnabr...@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.blyak...@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 < > rmannibu...@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 <gudnabr...@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 <gudnabr...@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 > >> >> <rmannibu...@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 <gudnabr...@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 > >> >>>> <rmannibu...@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 <gudnabr...@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 > >> >>>>>> <rmannibu...@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 <mben...@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 > >> >>>>>>>> <rmannibu...@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.blyak...@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 > >> >>>>>>>>>> <rmannibu...@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 <mben...@apache.org > >: > >> >>>>>>>>>>> > On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 1:01 PM, Michael Blyakher > >> >>>>>>>>>>> > <michael.blyak...@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 > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >> <rmannibu...@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.blyak...@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 > >> >>>>>>>>>>> >>> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >
