Closed larsnystrom closed 8 years ago
š This would solve a problem I currently haveā¦
Please take a look to #62
I think we should merge this and #67 (and make them compatible, since they overlap a little). #62 seems more like a refactor which will cause BC breaks. I'm not against that, but it won't happen until 3.0 or 4.0, while this can be merged without any BC breaks right now.
This fixes #69 and also touches #28. Basically it uses the message of an existing
NotEmpty
validator instead of creating a newNotEmpty
validator when a required input is missing.