Shibboleth Developers

[Brent Putman <>]

On 1/6/11 4:06 PM, Cantor, Scott E. wrote:

> 
> Another avenue is to say that we should check for *some* builders, such as 
> extensions like this, vs. changing every call to a built-in one. Over time, 
> some might migrate from checked to unchecked, but the old checks don't hurt 
> anything.
> 

That's true, since the extensions have to have config added and there's
the possibility of error - unlike with say the standard SAML stuff which
will be there as long as OpenSAML itself is.  It would be easy enough to
wrap calls in the extension in a helper, with null checks and explicit
logging.  Just a bit of busy work.  I can do, it's really  just a
question of where it falls in the priority list.