Canarie Installer suitability for Shib "quick start"? (response to Scott)

[Cantor, Scott]

On 2/28/17, 6:42 PM, "dev on behalf of Marlena Merrin-Erdos" <dev-bounces at shibboleth.net on behalf of marlena.erdos at gmail.com> wrote:

> OK.  Your take is that we should stick with the current installer.  

Per my other note, I don't see how your proposal could possibly be assuming anything different unless you put it on hold until there are further conversations about the packaging.

> Even if we stay with the current installer,  the QI Guide project still  needs to have "test LDAP connection" and "test attr
> resolve/filter" and "pretend SP" (to test the overall path even if there's canned authN).  I understand that these functions
> can be separate from the installer, but I still need to document them.

Yes, but worst case they're simply dealt with the same way people do now and the documentation can be updated to align to subsequent improvements, whenever those show up.

I mean, I don't know your schedule, but we're not shipping anything new before late 2017 (and I suspect lots of people are fine with that, they have enough to deal with getting to 3.3).

> I know you've created a ticket on this already. 

Yes, absolutely, but that's future work for this calendar year.

> Let's assume that Paul Caskey is an available resource -- for some amount of cycles.  Let's get specific.   If this is the "best"
> thing for him to work on, what would it take to create a self-contained test environment?  If it's not, what is (as related to
> to a QI Guide in some way)?

TIER obviously is free to take that on, but *we're* not able to do anything unless we have a clear plan for maintaining it, and right now that kind of testbed is just not in our scope.

But no, I don't think it's really the best thing to work on. It's a nice thing to have, but when people already have tiny amounts of time to get something up and running, that's really time wasted on a throw-away.

-- Scott