Next stable version of Samba.

[Chris Tooley]

I think this is a great idea.  I'm getting a little worried about the
enormous jump from 2.0.x versions of Samba to what I am seeing come
together from the HEAD and TNG branches of the code.  I slightly smaller
jump, named 2.2.x that would allow a transition in steps would be a nice
way to make the baby steps.  We're currently deciding if we want to stay
with NT 4.0 based Domains or upgrade to Win2000 and ADS, and I see that
as a huge headache of a migration.  I see going from 2.0.x to TNG or
HEAD almost as bad (although on a somewhat totally different level :)),
a "first step" to the upgrade would be welcomed in my opinion.

Plus 2.0.7 seems to be stable, for us, and works perfectly, for the
features the 2.0.x line can support, with no more adjustments (I'm sure
this is not an absolute for everyone).  The next logical step is the new
features, not necessarily fixing the features that work, at least for
me.

Chris Tooley


Jeremy Allison wrote:

> Hi all,
>
>         I'd like to ask to make a version number change
> for the next stable release. Currently we're planning to
> release something we're planning to call 2.0.8.
>
> However, what I'm actually busyly creating in the CVS tree
> is HEAD minus vfs and dfs and some of the TNG mods.
>
> This is a very big change to call 2.0.8, which implies a
> minor rev. on 2.0.7.
>
> Now I still want to ship this code as the next release,
> as it is *significantly* better than what otherwise would
> be in 2.0.8. I will go into more details on the changes
> in a later email, but this code is *definately* more robust
> and correct from an SMB standpoint than the 2.0.x code.
>
> But I'd like to call it 2.2.0 instead. That way people
> know this is a more significant change, and will hopefully
> do more testing before slotting this into a production
> system.
>
> Currently I have buy off from the rest of the Samba Team
> on this version change, what does everyone else think ?
>
> Regards,
>
>         Jeremy Allison,
>         Samba Team.
>
> --
> --------------------------------------------------------
> Buying an operating system without source is like buying
> a self-assembly Space Shuttle with no instructions.
> --------------------------------------------------------