Perform upstream merge 2020-06 #9
Comments
Updated the |
Complete list of upstream changes since last merge. Key:
|
@sroddy reports that the current aggregate generation process is not running exactly the incommon-v9 tag, so we will also need to reconcile some commits from another repository before this merge can happen. |
Interested parties: @nroy @ij @sroddy @dshafer @awu Feel free to unsubscribe from the issue if I've added you in error. List taken from the latest e-mail thread. It appears that the per-entity metadata process in production is using the incommon-v9 tag directly. The aggregate production process in production is using something with a couple of new files and an additional blob in |
Here's a more human-readable summary of the changes I think this merge will introduce to the InCommon tooling.
@nroy hopefully none of this sounds scary. If not, I will move to actually doing the merge and checking that nothing appears to have broken as a result. |
I have made a trial merge from upstream. This went very easily with just two conflicts which were easily resolved. I then had to make a small functional change to preserve behaviour which has moved from Xalan to a Java stage in the upstream. The result is that:
Everything else seems to be fine. The validity interval is hard-wired in the InCommon configuration, so the upstream changes don't affect that. We aren't seeing the changes related to long |
Created #13 to carry the Logo issue. |
This all looks good to me, thanks Ian |
A question: Kevin Morooney, our Vice President for Trust and Identity Services would like us to remove terms like |
I've had a general to-do about this in my list for a little while now, as I intend to make this change in all my own repositories. The other places I do client work are also moving in that direction, it's just a matter of "when" and not "whether". To some extent we're also waiting to see whether the community consensus is for I haven't actually done this myself yet, but my understanding is that it's not particularly hard. There may be some knock-on effects, but this seems like a good time to start finding out what they are. (The UKf part of the tooling is highly dependent on branch names as it uses I will write up an issue under the incommon-v10 milestone and look into doing this as part of the release. |
Done,
One change I needed to make for this to work was to set something like this in my
This is because, in the upstream, two files listing entities have been removed from the repository and placed in another location. This property change points that back to the original location for them. |
It's time we brought this repository up to date with the UK Federation upstream tooling, to bring in new functionality that we want to use.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: