OpenSAML user discussion

["Scott Cantor" <>]

> Best case scenario for us is
> a separate packaging of a metadata library with no dependency on
> OpenSAML proper.

One possibility would be to code up a minimal amount of SAML 2 package code
(for <Attribute> mainly) and base the metadata on that instead of the
original SAMLAttribute object that Shibboleth metadata references. With some
package adjustment for some of the shared code going forward (e.g.
org.opensaml.common), it might not overlap at all with org.opensaml and
wouldn't conflict.

But I'm not going to package it separately, if that's what you're after.

> This would take the pressure off GT to upgrade from
> 0.8 to 1.1 (which is nontrivial as it turns out) and still give GT and
> GridShib the metadata functionality they need.

Unless it's the XML stuff, I don't see why it's so non-trivial, there's no
way they're using any of the other stuff that radically changed. There can't
be much you could do with 0.8 that isn't mostly the same now, minus one or
two simple cases of object refactoring.

-- Scott