OpenSAML user discussion

["Scott Cantor" <>]

> I would be interested in any analysis of the generated bindings.

I'll certainly take a look, but I'm fairly busy at the moment, so I can't
promise a lot of useful feedback soon. I'm totally ignorant of JAXB, so I
really need more background in what it can do first to understand what might
break. Signature integrity would be the most likely problem.

> I would also be curious if a JAXB bindings based approached could be 
> cosnidered by opensaml project for SAML 2.0 ( I can provide similar 
> bindings for 2.0 in no time).

Possible, there's a lot up in the air right now. There might be
contributions coming from various directions. If people think JAXB is a
solution, I'll listen, but so far, the only people who have mentioned it
(prior to you) have mostly said "I understand now why you didn't use it", so
I had pretty much dismissed it until you asked.

Then, there's still the simple fact that I want portability. But C++ is
generally a superset of Java, so it's conceivable I guess that a lot of the
generated code could still port.

-- Scott