Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

JBIDE-12860 - JAX-RS validation problems are not linked #87

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Sep 25, 2013
Merged

JBIDE-12860 - JAX-RS validation problems are not linked #87

merged 1 commit into from Sep 25, 2013

Conversation

xcoulon
Copy link
Member

@xcoulon xcoulon commented Sep 23, 2013

Please review #86 first, as both PR provide changes for the same JaxrsMetamodelValidator class..

*
* @see {@link IMarker} for severity levels and values.
*/
abstract void setProblemLevel(final int level);
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

removal of this method affects API compatibility

Added a custom JAXRS_PROBLEM_TYPE attribute in JAX-RS markers.
Those JAX-RS Problem markers are now indexed with Lucene.
Thus, it becomes possible to look for resource that have the same
error as a given resource, even if this later one has been deleted.
(eg: looking for duplicate application problem after an application
has been removed).
When a JAX-RS Element is removed, its associated JAX-RS Markers are
removed from the index *during the validation phase* (the markers
still exist and are still indexed until the validation is performed).
Added some JUnit tests to verify the good behaviour againts the case
where a project has 2 JAX-RS application then one is removed.
@dgolovin dgolovin merged commit 8334480 into jbosstools:jbosstools-4.1.x Sep 25, 2013
@dgolovin
Copy link
Member

pushed to jbosstools-4.1.x as 8334480 and master as 2fa9be0

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants