[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CXF-5309?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13810456#comment-13810456
 ] 

Sergey Beryozkin commented on CXF-5309:
---------------------------------------

Hi Andriy,

I've applied your patch with few modifications. For the most part it's been 
really to do with pushing as much common code as possible to the core module so 
that a relevant JAXWS implementation can extend that and do few minor overrides:

http://svn.apache.org/r1537558

Here is the main changes:
- ValidationProvider has few more constructors and was moved to the core
- Abstract interceptors have been introduced with JAXRS in/out interceptors 
doing minor overrides
- JAXRSInvoker and feature have been added
- Out interceptor can be injected with the same instance of ValidationProvider 
or in case of the default instantiation it will pick it up from the exchange
- Validation API dep is currently optional - we need to have an OSGI-friendly 
API spec bundle ready first before we can make this dependency non-optional.
- You will note that all other dependencies are in systest/jaxrs - this is 
because javax.el build has been 'messed up' a bit with the target restricted to 
Java 7 which is a problem for CXF because it supports  Java 6. It's not a major 
problem, I think we can ship for example a Karaf validation feature with the 
latest javax.el and document it is only available for 1.7 - that should do 
because the feature is optional.

Let me know what you think about the code on the trunk, and the we can discuss 
what else can be done...

> Support Bean Validation API for JAX-RS
> --------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: CXF-5309
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CXF-5309
>             Project: CXF
>          Issue Type: Sub-task
>          Components: JAX-RS, JAX-WS Runtime
>            Reporter: Sergey Beryozkin
>         Attachments: patch-validation-poc.txt
>
>




--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.1#6144)

Reply via email to