|From:||Gémes Géza <geza-AT-kzsdabas.hu>|
|Subject:||Re: To release Samba 4.0 'as is'|
|Date:||Fri, 25 Nov 2011 07:07:34 +0100|
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. > Simo, > > 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 > pre-release. > > 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 thread: 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. Cheers Geza
Copyright © 2011, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds