I think I'd prefer option 1. More magic but it feels easier. On 11 avr. 2010, at 23:15, Gunnar Morling wrote:
> Answers inline. > > 2010/3/30 Emmanuel Bernard <emman...@hibernate.org> > > I like the idea. >> Initially we've decided to not add them and were waiting for the JSR-310. >> do you know the status and expected release? >> > > JSR 310 was in Early Draft Review stage from 26 Feb till 28 Mar. It's > planned to be included in Java 7, though AFAIK it's not totally sure whether > this is really going to happen. As Joda is quite widely in use I think it > would be nice to have support for it in Hibernate Validator. Once JSR 310 is > final, support for it could be added to HV, and surely also to the BV spec. > >> >> The main problem I see is that we would likely use the same annotations for >> both joda and the jsr-310. >> We could think of using @Constraint and use two validator implementations >> but unfortunately that would fail at runtime if we don't have Joda Time in >> the classpath. >> >> Anyone has an idea to work around that? >> > > I thought about supporting the standard BV @Past/@Future annotations at > Joda/JSR 310 types with Hibernate Validator. In that case the validator(s) > for Joda/JSR 310 might be registered automatically by HV (as all validators > for annotations from the BV API), probably after some reflective checking > whether Joda/JSR 310 is present in the class path or not. > > Alternatively one could provide one/two constraint-mapping XML file(s) to be > delivered with Hibernate Validator, which users might add to their > validation.xml in case they want to work with Joda/JSR 310. > > The second approach is more in line with the concepts of customization > defined by BV, while the first is probably more comfortable for Hibernate > Validator users. > > >> >> On 24 mars 2010, at 22:40, Gunnar Morling wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> for Hibernate Validator 4.1 we are planning to add some new constraints. >> In >>> this context Hardy and I discussed whether it might be worth to add >> support >>> for the date/time types from the Joda Time API ( >>> http://joda-time.sourceforge.net/) for the @Past/@Future standard >>> constraints. >>> >>> I think Joda is quite popular these days, and the upcoming JSR 310 is >>> heavily influenced by Joda, too (the spec lead is also the lead of Joda). >> So >>> this might add value for users, OTOH such support might be too specific. >> Are >>> there any opinions on this? >>> >>> Thanks, Gunnar >>> _______________________________________________ >>> hibernate-dev mailing list >>> hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org >>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev >> >> > _______________________________________________ > hibernate-dev mailing list > hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev _______________________________________________ hibernate-dev mailing list hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev
