Hi,

Regarding the legal stuffs, it's an issue until I upgrade the demo to an
official release. After that, I will only use official releases. At worst,
the demo will be out of date.

We can keep the same link: that's what I do for demos otherwise it's a
nightmare. Previous version x is simply moved in the x branch.

Thanks.
Best regards,
Jérôme




2016-01-21 15:11 GMT+01:00 larry mccay <[email protected]>:

> A build from master is not an official Apache release and there are
> specific rules for referencing release distributions and artifacts.
> Unfortunately, the language that I have found isn't clear enough for me to
> determine what if any violation exists there.
>
> I don't want to introduce a link in docs that will becomes stale for each
> release and require a refresh of the external demo repo that may require
> changes to previous versions of the docs, etc. When we release 0.9.0 - the
> 0.8.0 release will be obsolete. Can we assume that there will be a new one
> for 0.9.0 and have to change the link to point to that? Will the repo that
> was previously 0.8.0 be refreshed to 0.9.0 and subsequently require the
> link to be removed from the 0.8.0 docs?
>
> All of that said, I do see value in pac4j having this quick start demo.
>
> My suggestion is that the link in the Knox docs that point to detailed
> pac4j docs have a prominent pointer to the demo.
> The repo and your docs will be more easily kept in sync than cross project
> dependencies and new releases.
>
> On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 4:53 AM, Jérôme LELEU <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > OK. I still think that the demo is valuable for a quick startup, but
> above
> > all, it means that I must re-create the demo from the Apache release of
> > Knox 0.8.0 as soon as it will be available...
> >
> > I'm not sure to understand what is the problem with the current master in
> > terms of licensing, it's under the Apache license as well, isn't it?
> >
> >
> > 2016-01-20 13:46 GMT+01:00 larry mccay <[email protected]>:
> >
> > > You make an interesting point about usability here.
> > >
> > > At the same time, it highlights the fact that the installation would
> not
> > be
> > > from an Apache distribution channel and I would be concerned about
> folks
> > > checking out the demo and once it was working not picking up an
> official
> > > release.
> > >
> > > The current demo is based on your build from the master branch - I
> > assume.
> > > This isn't an official Apache release which is may be problematic
> > > license-wise.
> > >
> > > The steps that you describe for trying it out are necessary only
> because
> > it
> > > requires a build from master - until 0.8.0 is released. At which time,
> > the
> > > user would download an official Apache release of Knox 0.8.0, unzip it,
> > > copy the templates into place and fire it up.
> > >
> > > It might be interesting to consider a script for copying the templates
> > for
> > > various configurations into place as a usability improvement.
> > >
> > > I will try and find some Apache language about non-Apache distributions
> > for
> > > such a purpose and see whether it is legal to reference them.
> > > In the meantime, I would be interested in others' opinions on the
> matter.
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 5:11 AM, Jérôme LELEU <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > You're right: maintaining the demos is a work in itself and we could
> > > > (should) put samples in the templates directory.
> > > >
> > > > Though, I think the demo is valuable to promote Knox: let's say
> someone
> > > as
> > > > an Hadoop installation and want to secure it: how can he try Knox?
> > > Checkout
> > > > the source, build it, copy the templates at the right place: it might
> > be
> > > > discouraging and complicated for a beginner. While with the demo:
> > > checkout,
> > > > copy the launch command and test...
> > > >
> > > > In any case, it's in the pac4j organization.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks.
> > > > Best regards,
> > > > Jérôme
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > 2016-01-19 16:11 GMT+01:00 larry mccay <[email protected]>:
> > > >
> > > > > Hmmmm...
> > > > >
> > > > > I think that providing appropriate templates (see the templates
> > > directory
> > > > > in the knox install) for both the knoxsso.xml (instead of idp.xml)
> > and
> > > > > sandbox.xml to reflect the same config would provide the same value
> > and
> > > > be
> > > > > self contained without the need to keep the binaries up to date in
> > the
> > > > demo
> > > > > with each release.
> > > > >
> > > > > There is probably value in a blog for early access to pac4j
> provider
> > > demo
> > > > > that could point to the demo.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 9:04 AM, Jérôme LELEU <[email protected]>
> > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Should we add a link in the documentation to point to the demo?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 2016-01-19 14:19 GMT+01:00 larry mccay <[email protected]>:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > That's great!
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 7:53 AM, Jérôme LELEU <
> [email protected]>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Following my own idea, here is a demo with the Knox / pac4j
> > > > support:
> > > > > > > > https://github.com/pac4j/knox-pac4j-demo
> > > > > > > > Feel free to submit pull requests if you want me to amend it.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > What do you think?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Thanks.
> > > > > > > > Best regards,
> > > > > > > > Jérôme
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > 2016-01-18 11:03 GMT+01:00 Jérôme LELEU <[email protected]>:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > It's great news!
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > One more thing I'm thinking of: we always have a demo
> > > > corresponding
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > > a
> > > > > > > > > pac4j support. It would be great to have a knox-pac4j-demo
> > and
> > > > > > > reference
> > > > > > > > it
> > > > > > > > > from the manual. I can handle it.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Does it make sense?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Thanks.
> > > > > > > > > Best regards,
> > > > > > > > > Jérôme
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > 2016-01-17 6:37 GMT+01:00 larry mccay <[email protected]>:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >> KNOX-641 and KNOX-642 have both been committed to master.
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >> There is a new docs book where you can check out the pac4j
> > > docs
> > > > > > > > available:
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> http://knox.apache.org/books/knox-0-8-0/user-guide.html#Pac4j+Provider+-+CAS+/+OAuth+/+SAML+/+OpenID+Connect
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >> I have some additional ideas for the docs that I will roll
> > out
> > > > in
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > next
> > > > > > > > >> few days.
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >> We need to discuss the identity assertion approach for
> > 0.8.0.
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >> I think we are on track for 1/29 release date.
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to