Next stable version of Samba.

Simo Sorce simo.sorce at
Fri May 19 07:45:04 GMT 2000

Allen wrote:
> D.Bannon at said:
> > The fact is that we cannot just stop Samba Version numbers at 2.0.x
> > Mainstream samba will NEVER fulfill the 2.1 requirments mentioned in
> > the book. All development towards PDC is in the TNG branch  and works
> > very differently from how 2.1.0 would have been described.
> > If it was possible that the behaviour of 2.1.0 would eventually be
> > merged into mainstream samba it would be a different matter, however
> > when the PDC stuff appears there, it will behave like TNG, not 2.1.0.
> > So the book is wrong, nothing can be done about that.
> If that is the case, why not renumber it to 4.0.0, with statements to the
> effect that it breaks old instructions.
> As I understand it, if this is such a MAJOR rewrite, then a MAJOR renumber
> should be in order.
> again, my 2c

If that matters, I agree with the lasts statments.
The books are known to become soon obsolete and outdated in computer
science field, so it should not be so important to maintain versioning
compatibility with the book.
I think it is more important that different samba products that contain
major or consistent reworks are marked in a different way to avoid

The way I see this is:

2.0.x Current stable+bugfix branch
2.2.x New enhanced (stable?) branch
3.0.x The current HEAD branch
4.0.x The TNG branch

A page on that explain exactly what every version is and
differs from the others should be implemented (Many questions on the
list will be avoided).

Simo Sorce
Simo Sorce - Integrazione Sistemi Unix/Windows - Politecnico di Milano
E-mail: simo.sorce at 02 2399 2425 - 02 2399 2451
Be happy, use Linux!

More information about the samba-ntdom mailing list