Thats a cool approach. If you are going through the spec, then it would be
nice to have validation messages like:-

Validation failed:
Rule:-some rule from the ejb spec here:
spec version:3.1
section number:3.2.1
Fix:  (if we can suggest a fix)

We can put these messages in messages.properties and the key would be in the
form <spec-version>:<section-number> = message
example:-

3.1:3.2.1=some message here

The above suggestion is not very well thought out and I am sure there must
be some gotchas in it. But this would be a nice way to keep track of
messages and we can also at any point verify if a certain validation message
was already taken care of.

Another week and I will be able to jump into the project again and help out
in this area

On Sun, Feb 1, 2009 at 6:22 AM, Mohammad Nour El-Din <
[email protected]> wrote:

> Here is what I am going to do, I will read the specs 3.0 and 3.1 and
> write down the points we should validate on, check JIRA for any of
> these points implemented before, and add and implement the missing
> ones. But just to let you know according to my available time I will
> not be able to do that as quick as possible, it will take me sometime.
>
> On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 12:16 PM, Mohammad Nour El-Din
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Hi David...
> >
> >  As I have not been so active lately, I really would like to go and
> > help into this area. Any directions other than the ones you mentioned
> > in your mail ?
> >
> > On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 11:46 PM, David Blevins <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >> I just did some work in the validation area and it occurs to me how much
> >> work has yet to be done.  It is definitely one of our most critical
> features
> >> that users go "ooh" and "ahh" over.
> >>
> >> Code wise, its's one of those areas where the hardest part is being as
> >> thorough as possible.  I personally haven't been very thorough in my
> work
> >> there and have just been adding validations as they occur to me and most
> >> often without tests.  Definitely shame on me.
> >>
> >> I just added a new class, ValidationAssertions, which will check the
> >> ValidationFailedException failed exception thrown from the
> >> ConfigurationFactory on depoy.  It makes sure all the expected
> validation
> >> issues were spotted, that there are i18n messages for each message key,
> that
> >> there are the required three levels of messages, and that when formatted
> >> there are no unfilled "{0}" sections.  We get bit by that last one a
> lot.
> >>
> >> We really should add tests for all the checks/messages we have.
> >>
> >> There are also likely a ton of validations we don't do and should.  We
> >> should also get a list of all the annotations and make sure we have
> >> validations for each of them and add the ones where we don't.
> >>
> >> Thoughts?  Volunteers?
> >>
> >>
> >> -David
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > ----
> > Thanks
> > - Mohammad Nour
> > - LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/mnour
> > ----
> > "Life is like riding a bicycle. To keep your balance you must keep
> moving"
> > - Albert Einstein
> >
>
>
>
> --
> ----
> Thanks
> - Mohammad Nour
> - LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/mnour
> ----
> "Life is like riding a bicycle. To keep your balance you must keep moving"
> - Albert Einstein
>



-- 
Karan Singh Malhi

Reply via email to