The reason we can't continue using Samba

Jeremy Allison jeremy at
Thu Oct 5 19:38:05 GMT 2000

Joe Rhett wrote:

> And you have over and over stated that a timeline isn't possible. Since
> that effective means you could quite happily deliver in Q4 2002 we can't
> possibly count upon having Samba function in any realistic part of our
> organization.

Yes you can - file and print. Why is PDC support essential
for serving files and printers ? winbind single sign on
support will be added into the 2.2.x series also (for UNIXen
that support nsswitch modules).
> Nobody's asking for a do-or-die date.

But that *IS* exactly what you're asking for.

> We just want to know if you'll
> deliver in 2000, 2001, 2002 ....

3.0 will probably be "later this year" or "early next year".

It will ship when it *WORKS*. We don't want to ship buggy

Now - does that help ? Software schedules are notoriously
difficult to set. It's because we're professional programmers
that we wont give you a date. Remember, NT5 was due to ship
in 1997 ! What would have happened had you based an NT5 rollout
strategy on that date ?

Maybe we should just change the name to Samba/PDC-2001 (or
whatever date we actually *do* ship). This does seem to
work for marketing purposes.....


	Jeremy Allison,
	Samba Team.

Buying an operating system without source is like buying
a self-assembly Space Shuttle with no instructions.

More information about the samba-ntdom mailing list