Shibboleth Developers

["Mark Wilcox" <>]

I'm hoping to have something in place by January. 

If the code is stable in CVS, I'm willing to build off it - I just didn't
want to have to go through CVS if there was a tarball waiting for me :).

Mark

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Walter Hoehn 
> [mailto:]
> Sent: Friday, November 05, 2004 12:24 PM
> To: Mark Wilcox
> Cc: 
> 
> Subject: Re: speaking of the java class
> 
> Yes, the plan is for this to be included in the 1.3 release.  What is
> the timeframe for your next WebCT/Shib integration rev?
> 
> -Walter
> 
> 
> On Nov 5, 2004, at 11:14 AM, Mark Wilcox wrote:
> 
> > Speaking of the Java Service Provider  -- is that in the current
> > release or is that coming out in 1.3? I’m much rather use this code as
> > the basis for my next revision on WebCT/Shib integration than
> > continuing with my homegrown code.
> >
> >
> >
> > Mark
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Howard Gilbert 
> > [mailto:]
> >  Sent: Friday, November 05, 2004 11:53 AM
> > To: 
> > 
> > Subject: shireURL, providerId, applicationId, and target parameters
> >
> >
> >
> > The C++ and Java Service Providers have potential differences in their
> > configuration philosophy. Currently the same configuration file
> > generates the same result thanks to careful programming.
> >
> >
> >
> > Everything you need is already part of the protocol and configuration
> > schemas. I would argue that the current C++ code and the resulting
> > configuration examples assume some redundancy in items that need not
> > be redundant. There are some interesting possibilities here if we are
> > willing to draw some distinctions. Or maybe not.
> >
> >
> >
> > I have written a rather extensive discussion of the interplay between
> > parameters, and lay some proposals on the table for a broader
> > interpretation. See
> >
> >
> >
> > http://tp.its.yale.edu/shib/tiki-index.php?page=ShireUrl
> >
> >