On 09/12/2015 14:33, Tony Stevenson wrote:
On Wed, 9 Dec 2015, at 12:52 PM, Francesco Chicchiriccò wrote:
On 09/12/2015 13:16, Tony Stevenson wrote:
Francesco,
As I said in HipChat, I'd love to be able to say that we can do this.
But the fact is right now infra are tied up for at least 6 months.
I think the best way to gain any traction on this is for the Syncope PMC
to stand up a PoC that replaces 1 (or more) of the components used.
As anticipated via HipChat, this is actually the deep sense of my
proposal, e.g. the direct engagement of Syncope PMC - not only,
actually, but anyone interested - for supporting the infra team.
A PoC sounds like a straight, concrete and limited way to start
approaching IdM at ASF with Syncope.
i.e. these might include:
- https://id.apache.org (The end-user part of it)
- acreq - The user account request workflow
- Identity Management as a whole.
- PMC karma management
I will be more than happy to help guide the PMC, and give you an ASF VM
on which you can stand up your PoC, and guide you on the business logic
already in place for any of these tools.
That's good - IMO we need:
1. a place where to ask for information, provide feedback, etc. (shall
we keep crossposting infra@ and dev@syncope?)
Keep infra@ in the loop. If we start crossing into anything sensitive
we will move that part of the thread to a more sensible location.
Understand: what about JIRA notifications (see below)?
2. VM
Open a JIRA issue for this, and one can be provisioned for you.
Fine.
3. SCM
Ideally you'd work by submitting patches against the
infrastructure-puppet repo for the deployment and config.
Not sure: a Syncope deployment is an actual Maven project which
produces one or two WAR files to be deployed on a supported Java EE
container (Tomcat is fine), which requires a dedicated DBMS (PostgreSQL
or MySQL are fine, naturally).
So I'd say we eventually need to patch infrastructure-puppet for
deploying Syncope, but we still require a git-wip repo for the actual
project sources (which will depend of official Syncope artifacts but
also embed all the configuration, business logic, ...).
4. (possibly) some issue tracker (not necessarily JIRA, something
simpler would fit the job as well)
JIRA is the infra preference as in we use that today. I'd just use the
JIRA project and move on. Less hassle.
Fine: wouldn't it be better to feature a dedicated mailing list for
notifications? Even fosslists.org as Daniel suggested in HipChat.
5. (nice to have) some wiki (not necessarily Confluence, something
simpler would fit the job as well)
Again, you can use the infra space on cwiki.
Fine.
Regards.
For a long time we have tried to manage identity, or some cut-down
version of it, solely via LDAP. Then we added id.apache.org, and then
acreq was added. They were all really disjointed efforts. If we can
bring all this under one roof, and make it usable I think it will be a
win.
The idea of a PoC is to be able to demonstrate that Syncope could
basically be dropped in, and replace one of these components.
We'd also want some decent handover and/or training from the Syncope
community. I'm not sure we'd accept it if the community wanted to
support it on it's own, because the sad fact is people move on, and we
would be left with a critical piece of the jigsaw remaining unsupported.
Agree on this last point as well: I'd suggest to identify someone from
the infra team which could follow activities, provide inputs, etc since
the beginning.
--
Francesco Chicchiriccò
Tirasa - Open Source Excellence
http://www.tirasa.net/
Involved at The Apache Software Foundation:
member, Syncope PMC chair, Cocoon PMC, Olingo PMC, CXF committer
http://home.apache.org/~ilgrosso/
