Next stable version of Samba.

Gregory Leblanc GLeblanc at
Wed May 17 21:45:00 GMT 2000

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jeremy Allison [mailto:jeremy at]
> Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2000 2:28 PM
> To: Multiple recipients of list SAMBA-NTDOM
> Subject: Next stable version of Samba.
> 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 ? 

My understanding, while possibly flawed, was that the 2.0.x increments were
for bug fixing, and perhaps minor feature enhancements.  If there is going
to be more than minor feature changes, then I'd agreen with "upping" the
revision more sifignantly.  It doesn't seem like this is something that
should require big discussions, and anybody who wants to respond should
probably have taken a look at the Software-Release-Practices HOWTO by ESR.
Hopefully I haven't overstepped my bounds, and won't get too many flames for
that one.

P.S. I'm looking forward to seeing what the proposed changes will be for the
next Samba, TNG is too scary to use on my real domain at work.

More information about the samba-ntdom mailing list