[Samba] Which sub version of Samba 4.19 will be considered for Debian bookworm-backports?

[Peter Milesson]

On 05.09.2023 19:50, Rowland Penny via samba wrote:
> On Tue, 5 Sep 2023 19:20:17 +0200
> Peter Milesson via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote:
>
>> Hi folks,
>>
>> I'm just curious about which subversion of Samba 4.19 that will
>> trickle down to Debian bookworm-backports?
>>
>> I have a hunch I saw a note from either Rowland or Louis van Belle
>> quite a few years back on this list, that the .0 and .1, and
>> possibly .2 versions of Samba, are not considered stable enough for
>> production. Please, correct me if I have got it wrong.
> It was Louis that said that he didn't use '.0' & '.1' minor Samba
> versions in production and I said something like 'I don't use the .0
> versions', but that was a long time ago and was after there had been a
> couple of major releases that had had problems, these problems do not
> seem to happen now and I am quite willing to use any supported Samba
> versions, this includes '.0' & '.1' versions.
>   
>> Otherwise it would be interesting to know, as I plan integration with
>> Microsoft Azure later this year. What I understand, Microsoft has
>> changed the requirements to at least AD forest level 2016 for that
>> integration, while previously 2008R2 was sufficient.
> I have no idea if 4.19.x will go into Bookworm-backports and I also do
> not think that Samba has any pull on this. The person who may know is
> Michael Tokarev, the Debian Samba maintainer.
>
> Rowland
>
Hi Rowland,

Thanks for the clarification.

Best regards,

Peter