RelyingPartyByTag require multiple entity attribute values

[Jeffrey Crawford]

That almost worked on the first try! If you wanted to use that as a
template for someone else, the only thing I needed to do was replace '>'
with '/>' on the TagCandidate lines.

so instead of:
<bean parent="TagCandidate" c:name="http://example.org/foo" p:values="bar">
<bean parent="TagCandidate" c:name="http://example.org/foo2" p:values="bar">

using:
<bean parent="TagCandidate" c:name="http://example.org/foo" p:values="bar"
/>
<bean parent="TagCandidate" c:name="http://example.org/foo2" p:values="bar"
/>


>From the example structure it seems like I should also be able to
arbitrarily mix and match "matching Types". I know I originally only asked
for a combination of tags but a global group might be interesting too. So I
tried the following in one of the "AND'd" constructor-args:
<bean
class="org.opensaml.saml.common.profile.logic.EntityGroupNamePredicate"
      c:groupNames="urn:mace:ucsc.edu:metadata:local" />

But I think I'm missing something in the section:
<bean class="com.google.common.base.Functions"
      factory-method="compose">

because the log is complaining about a missing beans in the constructor
arguments, however I'm not understanding the connection between the classes
to understand what's missing.



Jeffrey E. Crawford
ITS Application Administrator (IdM)
831-459-4365
jeffreyc at ucsc.edu

Both pilots and IT professionals require training and currency before
charging into clouds!
---------------------------------------

On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 4:59 PM, Cantor, Scott <cantor.2 at osu.edu> wrote:

> On 6/8/15, 11:32 PM, "Jeffrey Crawford" <jeffreyc at ucsc.edu> wrote:
>
>
>
> >Is there a way to make a RelyingPartyOverride bean entry to require the
> >presence of two attributes? I seem to be able to perform an "or" but not
> >an "and"
>
> The wiring is *very* ugly, but this is an untested example that should be
> pretty close:
>
> http://pastebin.com/5vPx3VA3
>
>
> There are large portions of that I can hide behind parent beans to make it
> easier. But I might also be able to just expose a basic AND/OR flag also
> so that it's not necessary to wrap the individual conditions in an AND
> explicitly.
>
> This is functional programming, basically. It's certainly possible to do
> this in a script, this just replaces a script with a functional program
> written in Spring-ese.
>
> -- Scott
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list send an email to
> users-unsubscribe at shibboleth.net
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://shibboleth.net/pipermail/users/attachments/20150610/42acaf95/attachment.html>