SYSKEY2. Request For Comments

[Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton]

@begin defensive-mode

just a friendly "warning shot across the bows" - noone's allowed to flame
jeremy.  thx ppl, i hope you understand.  sensible comments only, please

@end defensive-mode

On Tue, 8 Feb 2000, Sander Striker wrote:

> >> sorry ppl, fed up with arguing and explaining this, my hands are now
> >> constantly hurting.  i'm creating a syskey2, it's going in the source
> >> code, if you don't like it, jeremy, well, work it out for yourself as to
> >> why it's needed.
> >
> >Luke, this is *not* going into the shipping source, for reasons I
> >have already explained. 
> 
> This may be, but are you also following the thread in samba-tech? I don't
> think you two are on the same level of communication. :-)

jeremy's busy.  i'm vocal, verbose, and not prone to summarising.
 
> >This is why I don't like you running off
> >in a branch. This is why your branches get abandoned.
> 
> Hey, this is not very nice.

it's ok, jeremy works on the main smb system code, almost exclusively, and
really hard.  he doesn't have time to catch up on two years worth of
development of the nt domain stuff, despite wanting to stay current with
it.

> Luke's branch is probably the most active

the branch i work in is _always_ the most active.

> >This will just make mine and Andrews job of extracting the *useful*
> >code from your branch even more difficult. And it's already *too*
> >difficult.
> 
> Maybe the other way around is easier done :-) :-)

i know that, except it's going to have to be done piecemeal.