Shibboleth Developers

At 3:54 PM -0500 12/18/01, Russell J. Yount wrote:
> Steven,
> 	Different architectures for production verses development is 
> less that optimal.
> If we need to track down some alignment or byte order problems it 
> would best to have
> one of each type for both development and production. Or just stay 
> with one acrhitecture
> for now.

well, my take on this is that we're going to encounter these 
different versions in the field, as we deploy. Do we want that 
initial encounter to be in-house, in our test environments, or on 
some campus (in the UK?)  I don't think we're going to be able to 
require that a pilot site run OpenLdap,,, especially if they already 
have iPlanet installed and running. My experience tells me that

-- you're right, we're going to encounter obscure problems as a 
result of having to support a variety of backends.

-- its going to be a *lot* easier to debug these problems in-house, 
in a controlled environment, than at a pilot site, with different 
time pressures, and an environment we don't control.

Does this make any sense?

>         We would prefer Redhat Linux.
>
>         Stock CVS would be fine.
>
>         We would prefer Openldap, we do not have Netscape directory.
>
> -Russ

--

------------------------------------------------------mace-shib-design-+
For list utilities, archives, subscribe, unsubscribe, etc. please visit the
ListProc web interface at 

   http://archives.internet2.edu/

------------------------------------------------------mace-shib-design--