+1 to fix it properly, I noted three important changes (one which is a mistake of last release and one ):
1. make back DEFAULT_ANNOTATED_TYPE_FILTER private (making it public was likely an error and shouldn't be used since it is wrong for all apps except bval project itself) 2. we should not use so much reflection in the extension but the Annotated model of CDI (we already have it partially with annotatedType and it has all we need in terms of reflection - concretely java.lang.reflect shouldn't be in favor of CDI API and Reflection class usage is 100% useless for type hierarchy but even more for annotations to enable other extensions to change the annotations programmatically and comply to CDI and disable/enable bean validation programmatically) 3. i'm not sure the change respects the overriding of methods (once 2 is done it shouldn't be an issue) but this can enable bean validation in a child which would have omitted it Romain Manni-Bucau @rmannibucau <https://x.com/rmannibucau> | .NET Blog <https://dotnetbirdie.github.io/> | Blog <https://rmannibucau.github.io/> | Old Blog <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <https://github.com/rmannibucau> | LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book <https://www.packtpub.com/en-us/product/java-ee-8-high-performance-9781788473064> Le mer. 19 mars 2025 à 08:45, Markus Jung <ju...@apache.org> a écrit : > Hey all, > > > unfortunately the fix for BVAL-222 (and thus 3.0.2) was incomplete and > contained a regression I noticed when testing the recent TomEE release > candidate, for more context see BVAL-223. WDYT about rolling another > release? I'll of course offer myself again to act as the release manager. > > > Thanks > > Markus > >
