Kiran,

I certainly didn't want or expect you to be disappointed!  It is however
a bit disingenuous to say that *WE* forked eSCIMo and kept it private
since you and I discussed the fact that your ideas for eSCIMo moved
towards an untyped mapping system while we moved towards a fully-typed
model of the SCIM resources based on a first-principles dissection of
the SCIM specification.

It was your suggestion that we fork the project (at the time I think
there were three files checked into eSCIMo) and the major contribution
to the project is that it's still (for the time being) using Wink.  You
also suggested the name "igloo" and didn't feel the Apache Directory
server project would want to create another repository for it.  Since we
had a Gitolite system running (and hadn't created the PennState Github
account yet, we added your public key to our Gitolite system on July
15th, 2013 and gave you read/write access to both the igloo source code
and the kerberos-client source code (which is not nearly finished).

We've only had sporadic conversations on IRC and I personally could have
done a lot more to keep this team up-to-date.  Igloo is *NOT* back-end
specific but our implementation, which is plugged into igloo as a
provider is very specific to OpenLDAP and Fortress.  It's also not
completely SCIM compliant.  I guess the biggest reason I haven't spent
more time collaborating on igloo is that a) you didn't seem interested
and I knew that eSCIMo was developing as part of a delivery to your
client and b) we had our own dead-lines for completing the implementation.

In the mean-time, I talked with Emmanuel at JavaOne 2013 and Shawn
McKinney at JavaOne 2014.  Emmanuel never sent me a public key for the
repository but even today, you can check the igloo source out of our
repository.

In any case, please accept my humble apologies ... I don't want the
chasm that appears to have grown between us to grow any wider!  Can we
at least build a bridge?

I won't be at all insulted if you reject the idea of adding igloo (or
whatever it ends up being called) to the Apache Directory project.  SCIM
has a relatively large following and once the code we're offering is
cleaned up, documented and fixed to match the final SCIM 2.0
specification (we're currently bringing it up to draft 17's state), I'm
sure the code will be appreciated by the SCIM community and could stay
either on the PennState GitHub repository or be incorporated into the
Internet2's middle-ware offerings.  Since the individuals reading this
e-mail have been hugely helpful in our meeting the university's goals,
we thought it was only fair to offer it back here where it started.

This is also not a code dump - We expect to spend a significant amount
of time bringing the code up to standards (our own and if necessary,
your style guidelines) and we're actually going to fix the architectural
mistakes made in the code before the world starts using it.  I expect to
remain a committer and perhaps the primary maintainer whereever the code
ends up (even if we keep it private).  Fortunately, we've been hiring
some great JavaEE Software Engineers in the last few months and I'll get
to go back to being the architect/programmer.

We'll also be releasing a pretty broad suite of tools along with the
framework - this e-mail is long enough without listing out the modules
we'll provide.

In any case, I'm truly apologize for any hurt feeling this has caused.

Steve

Reply via email to