|| ||Gémes Géza <geza-AT-kzsdabas.hu> |
|| ||samba-technical-AT-lists.samba.org |
|| ||Re: To release Samba 4.0 'as is' |
|| ||Fri, 25 Nov 2011 07:07:34 +0100|
|| ||Article, Thread
2011-11-25 02:27 keltezéssel, Andrew Bartlett írta:
> On Wed, 2011-11-23 at 16:23 -0500, simo wrote:
>> On Tue, 2011-11-22 at 17:13 +1100, Andrew Bartlett wrote:
>>> What do others think?
>> I think this plan makes no sense.
>> Dropping an alpha release on the floor and slapping the "stable" sticker
>> on it is not what our users expect.
> I think you have seriously misunderstood my proposal. As a Software
> Engineer, I do not drop releases on the floor and call them "stable".
> I'm more than happy to continue to make alpha releases, but what I'm
> suggesting is that we gather our current state, and proceed in an
> orderly fashion to a beta or pre-release, without first making major
> architectural changes. In short I'm suggesting that now is a good
> time for a feature freeze.
>> I no way the waf build is currently usable in production for the file
>> server part.
> Can you please tell me what specifically is unsuitable about the smbd or
> samba file server under the waf build?
>> Many have chimed here so I will not repeat all the very sane points made
>> by a great number of people, please listen to them and do not just
>> dismiss their concern. They may be related to specific issues that may
>> look minor to you. But I assure you they are definitely not.
> I've seen a number of concerns, and I've asked for them to be spelled
> out, some in technical detail. I'll patiently wait for those technical
> details, so I can address those which I am able, because with specific
> issues we can take specific action.
>> We are the people that will have to *support* whatever is dropped out
>> there. And we want to be comfortable we *can* do that job. We currently
>> can't without still great pains.
> I have no intention to 'drop' anything 'out there'. I would like to
> propose that the team move to a feature freeze, and then a beta or
> In terms of support, I and others working on the AD components have
> carried the support for those components for quite some time now, and
> I'm sure that will continue.
>> Any regressions in the build system or in the file server functionality
>> is not acceptable.
> Are there any current regressions I should be aware of?
> Andrew Bartlett
As someone who followed closely this thread and being personally
interested in the AD part, but not only (currently running a Samba4 AD
test domain, will need to introduce it in production before summer). I
would propose an intermediate solution to the extremes presented on this
Call the Samba 4.0 release Samba-AD (the idea behind the name belongs to
Sernet people), and continue to release Samba3 as Samba-FS. This way
people would have a suggestion where those are going to be deployable.
Of course I DON'T propose the end of the integration efforts. But if the
plan is to do a release in the near future that seems a good (certainly
not perfect) compromise. Having a Samba release with ability to act as
an AD DC is becoming more and more important to many people who have to
upgrade their network infrastructure.
to post comments)