COmanage Developers List

["Michael R. Gettes" <>]

Um, I guess you are referring to the yet to be released version fixing
the import/export problems?  Cuz the issue is exactly related to
the import/export problem.

/mrg

On May 28, 2008, at 10:43, Mike Olive wrote:

> "** Signet will have to be a back-burner thing for now given how it
> wipes out previous copies of it's own info during upgrades"
>
>
> I seem to recall that Signet 1.0.x is being used for this effort. I  
> suspect that
> a later version of Signet has resolved this issue of portability  
> across
> release version. Enhancements were made in release 1.2.x that  
> provided better
> release management.
>
> --
> MO
>
>
> < -----Original Message-----
> < From: Heather Flanagan 
> [mailto:]
> < Sent: Friday, May 23, 2008 3:24 PM
> < To: 
>
> < Subject: [comanage-dev] Notes from COmanage meeting @
> < Stanford, 2008-05-23
> <
> < COmanage update meeting, May 23, 2008
> < Attendees: Bruce, Scotty, Digant, Heather
> <
> < Highlight:
> < * Scotty demo's current pre-alpha COmanage web install
> <
> <
> < Changes in the last month:
> < * we now have access for all we want to do
> < * use cases are now settled
> < * the virtual machine is at a point where this can be brought up as
> < an SP; confluence is done but not automated; grouper and LDAP-PC is
> < working in dev but isn't in the main image yet, still needs  
> automation
> < * Heather has contacted Lois about GUI; meeting to be scheduled
> <
> <
> < Other notes
> < * after discussion at MIT, significant thought going in to how to
> < commonly represent authorization that can feed in to LDAP; if this
> < problem is solved, it won't really matter what the
> < authorization tool
> < may be within COmanage because the tools would be feeding
> < information
> < in a more standard fashion
> < ** Signet will have to be a back-burner thing for now given how it
> < wipes out previous copies of it's own info during upgrades
> < ** including any kind of authority manager thing won't work until
> < that space is more mature; most folks use groups at this point and
> < don't actually understand authority
> < * Scotty did receive the agreement from Atlassian for redistribution
> < and sent to Ken; Ken needs to get that signed; verbal
> < commentary from
> < Atlassian rep is that they have no problem with us redistributing
> < anything they have
> < * we need to get an anonymous download ready for the VM
> <
> <
> < Contact with the test case VO's
> < * science researcher from Penn State went to CSG and spoke well of
> < COmanage and Stanford; Scotty & Digant is going to be talking with
> < LIGO folks against next week to talk about GUMS
> < * no recent contact with OOI
> <
> <
> < Deployment scenarios we'll want to explore
> < * VM appliance (we're building)
> < * Xen appliance (future)
> < * physical Debian box (future)
> < ** someone else can do RedHat/SuSE/other
> < * EC2 (to be done at Penn State)
> <
> <
> < Upcoming work
> < * plan to integrate some of the Guest Account code in the
> < install for
> < COmanage so that people can create accounts themselves (with limited
> < access)
> < * plan to have the virtual appliance ready for people to test by end
> < of June (still need to find LDAP plugin's for wordpress, mediawiki)
> < * set up the subversion and debian repositories
> < * start to put together a presentation for the website
> <
> <
> <
> < Heather Flanagan
> < Director, System Administration
> < 
>
> <
> <
> <
> <
> <