Good suggestion!
Trying to figure out what save does in all contexts has been a challenge...
and those that know native JPA are familiar with these seven often used methods:
clear()
contains()
detach()
flush()
merge()
persist()
remove()
@ee6 only: that's correct
however, it looks like that user is using a manual setup with bv v1.1.
- we need to add that information to the documentation (about ee6 and bv
v1.0) and/or we validate the bv-api with an extension.
regards,
gerhard
2015-08-21 17:35 GMT+02:00 Rafael Benevides
Hi all,
Yesterday Gerhard asked me to take a look at the following issue:
https://github.com/jpangamarca/bean-validation-shutdown-issue
After some investigation I found that ConstraintValidatorFactory included a
new method in Java EE 7 (#releaseInstance
Yeap.
You right!
In this case I think we should drop a note at
http://deltaspike.apache.org/documentation/bean-validation.html about it.
On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 11:16 AM, John D. Ament johndam...@apache.org
wrote:
Rafael,
The bean validation module should not be used in EE 7 app servers,
Rafael,
The bean validation module should not be used in EE 7 app servers, it was
meant to plug a hole in EE 6 containers to continue to leverage injection
into EE 6 constraint validators (a need I had at the time, which is now
replaced by using an EE 7 container).
John
On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at
Rafael Benevides created DELTASPIKE-983:
---
Summary: Investigate issue with DeltaSpike Validation Module
Key: DELTASPIKE-983
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DELTASPIKE-983
Project:
Thinking more about it, makes sense for me. I'll open a ticket and propose
a fix.
On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 11:12 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau rmannibu...@gmail.com
wrote:
If we use the new API shouldnt it run on ee6? The method would never be
looked up normally.
Le 21 août 2015 08:09, Rafael
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DELTASPIKE-983?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=14706892#comment-14706892
]
Rafael Benevides commented on DELTASPIKE-983:
-
After some investigation I
@thomas:
we could do that, however, we would need to check several topics (e.g.: the
overhead and possible side-effects with bv v1.1+).
regards,
gerhard
2015-08-21 19:18 GMT+02:00 Romain Manni-Bucau rmannibu...@gmail.com:
shouldnt a runtime validation be done as well?
+1 to
IMO the module should work on both EE6 and EE7.
We often provide a WAR file and the customers decide where to deploy it.
2015-08-21 19:00 GMT+02:00 Gerhard Petracek gerhard.petra...@gmail.com:
@ee6 only: that's correct
however, it looks like that user is using a manual setup with bv v1.1.
-
shouldnt a runtime validation be done as well?
+1 to support/tolerate server upgrade without repackaging
Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau https://twitter.com/rmannibucau | Blog
http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com | Github https://github.com/rmannibucau |
LinkedIn
So the discussions on this died down, but I think we should still plan to
do something regarding the issue.
I'd like to propose that we do #1 and the back half of #4.
We may want to add some additional comments. For example, recommend that
the @Id column is always nullable, which should clarify
All,
Based on the findings from Harald, and the general issues being seen with
EntityRepository I'd like to propose that we add merge and persist methods
to the EntityRepository interface.
Both methods would delegate down direct to the underlying EntityManager's
methods of the same signature and
First an FYI... the Ford Motor Company Intellectual Property attorney group
approved our (ten specifically named Software Engineers) participation with the
Apache DeltaSpike community yesterday. So, we can now use the word Ford in
our informal communications. :-)
This does not represent a
In a case like this, we can add a method releaseInstance to the bval module
to match what's in the spec. It couldn't have @Override since it wouldn't
match for bean validation 1.0.
Realistically if you're targeting an EE7/ bean val 1.1 this module makes no
sense and you're actually being
2015-08-21 17:52 GMT-07:00 John D. Ament johndam...@apache.org:
In a case like this, we can add a method releaseInstance to the bval module
to match what's in the spec. It couldn't have @Override since it wouldn't
match for bean validation 1.0.
Not sure it is important at runtime - actually
16 matches
Mail list logo
