Hi Francesco and Fabio, I agree with you. Actually SPML it's not an essential feature, and I think that roadmap items priority it's correct (there are more important features to implement and Rest and Java API can already cover integration issue).
Which standard is the best to implement it's difficult to say, reading [4] SCIM should be better so, in this moment, I think that the decision can be postponed ;). Bye, Denis > -----Messaggio originale----- > Da: Francesco Chicchiriccò [mailto:[email protected]] > Inviato: martedì 8 maggio 2012 16.20 > A: [email protected] > Oggetto: Re: SPML Support > > > On 08/05/2012 16:16, Fabio Martelli wrote: > > Il giorno 08/mag/2012, alle ore 15.48, Denis Signoretto ha scritto: > > > >> > >> Hi Everybody, > >> > >> in Syncope Roadmap, even though Rest API it'a fastest approach, > >> do you already evaluated introduction of standard SPML > >> suppport (ref. [1])? > > Hi Denis, > > we already evaluated SPML at the beginning of the project. > > At that time the adoption of this standard seemed to be a > little bit in reduction so we thoughts that the effort to > implement a SPML interface for Syncope was unjustified. > > Personally, today I think the same and a simple search with > google give me a sort of confirmation to my idea. > > It seems instead [3] [4] that another emerging standard should be > supported: SCIM. > > In my opinion, the effort to implement SPML or SCIM could > roughly be the > same, hence I would prefer the latter. > WDYT? > > >> [1] > http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/tc_home.php?wg_abbrev=provision > >> [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Service_Provisioning_Markup_Language [3] http://idlogger.me/2012/01/13/thoughts-on-scim/ [4] http://blog.sailpoint.com/2011/12/scim/ -- Francesco Chicchiriccò Apache Cocoon PMC and Apache Syncope PPMC Member http://people.apache.org/~ilgrosso/
