Shibboleth 2.0 SP packages look ready

[Scott Cantor]

> Yup, a provision that requires modified works to not be called SAML is
> fine from a DFSG perspective.  There's some fuzziness around places where
> the name is part of the interface specification, so if the wording could
> avoid saying that all of the XML namespaces have to be renamed, that would
> be ideal.  We might be able to work even with that, though.

That kind of thing really falls into the "that's not allowed in the XML
world" bucket anyway. If somebody tried to change the schema without
changing the namespace, they'd get roasted and deservedly so.

-- Scott