Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
lkcl at regent.push.net
Sat Apr 18 17:45:11 GMT 1998
On Sat, 18 Apr 1998, Dana Canfield wrote:
> Just a couple of questions (somewhat related to my earlier message).
> I'm sure we all realize it's a bad idea, but there are several of us
> using the PDC code in production. Even with it's current basic
> functionality it does what we (meaning my campus) need to get us by for
> now. So the questions I have are:
> 1) 1.9.19 will still contain the current level of NTPDC functionality,
> 2) Assuming 1), is it safe to assume that whatever NTDOM functionality
> exists at the point of 1.9.19's release will be of "release" quality
> (except for the fact that user/group methodologies may get a major
mmmm.... nooo, i wouldn't say so. it will probably be enabled by "domain
controller = yes", and would be unannounced. those people on this list
prepared to use it on the basis that it's not quite ready, but provides
sufficient basic stuff as-is, fine.
> 3) From a developer's point of view, do you forsee any major problems
> being encountered for us who are using in production (particularly as of
> the 1.9.19 release).
mmmm... file properties and such, as we've already seen. as people use
this, so the problems crop up. we get to understand them, and deal with
them. that's the best we can offer: this is quote free unquote software
so there aren't actually any quote employed unquote developers on it: just
people who will find a means and a way to keep working on it because it
> As before, I don't mean to sound like I'm asking you to rush things
> along or anything,
no, but the priorities change a bit...
> It's impressive how far the NTDOM stuff has come in just a few months.
> It seems to provide the basic services of authentication and home
> directory/profile service pretty well. Personally, I'd be happy with
> the code as it stands as a "first release," and the only thing I'm
> really anxious for is seeing how the user/group stuff matures.
we will definitely be warning people if there's anything that goes into
the cvs tree that could break things. if it will take significant time,
then another branch will be opened.
the "alpha" series has almost turned into "betas". so if you want to stay
semi-stable, stick with 19alphaNNs or 19pNs...
> BTW, am I the only one who thinks commentable, scriptable, controllable
> configuration files really rock compared to graphical interfaces that
> require you to point and click to enter everything?
not at all: i bet you get paid more, too.
More information about the samba-ntdom