Thanks to our users providing us feedback on our 6.0 release, we were able to fix a few annoying issues and we are happy to announce the release of Hibernate Validator 6.0.2.Final.

This is a recommended upgrade for everyone using Hibernate Validator 6.0.x and it is a drop-in replacement of 6.0.1.Final.

What’s new since 6.0.1.Final?

We fixed 2 annoying bugs:

  • HV-1471, reported by William Eddy - An important issue in the new value extraction infrastructure: it could lead to the engine trying to extract a value from an already unwrapped value;

  • HV-1470, reported by Jean-S├ębastien Roy - The annotation processor might report an error in a perfectly valid use case: a constraint validator declared through the programmatic API or the XML configuration. This issue is only relevant to people using the annotation processor.

The Brazilian Portuguese translation was updated by Hilmer Chona and Thiago Mouta.

Marko also made a few improvements to the annotation processor regarding the value extraction support in HV-1395.

The complete list of fixed issues can be found on our JIRA.

Getting 6.0.2.Final

To get the release with Maven, Gradle etc. use the GAV coordinates org.hibernate.validator:{hibernate-validator|hibernate-validator-cdi|hibernate-validator-annotation-processor}:6.0.2.Final. Note that the group id has changed from org.hibernate (Hibernate Validator 5 and earlier) to org.hibernate.validator (from Hibernate Validator 6 onwards).

Alternatively, a distribution bundle containing all the bits is provided on SourceForge (TAR.GZ, ZIP).

If you want to benefit from the new features of this version on WildFly, we also provide WildFly patches for WildFly 10.1 and WildFly 11.0 Beta1 (wait for the synchronization to Maven Central). You can read about how to apply such patches here.

What’s next?

We will continue to release maintenance releases to fix quickly the issues reported by our users.

With your help, we hope to update the translations of the constraint messages in the future releases.

And finally, we also intend to explore potential features for a future spec revision. Always good to have feedback from the field before setting the API in stone.

Feedback, issues, ideas?

To get in touch, use the usual channels:

Back to top