2.0 Branch

Jeremy Allison jallison at cthulhu.engr.sgi.com
Mon Nov 16 19:20:50 GMT 1998

Andy Smith wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 17, 1998 at 05:28:21AM +1100, Jeremy Allison wrote:
> >
> > I just wanted to point out to people busily checking
> > in fixes into the CVS tree that *none* of these changes
> > will go into the Samba 2.0 *release* code unless you also
> > check them into the SAMBA_2_0 branch.
> Sorry, I'm a bit confused.  Where should I be collecting cvs code
> from?  I am not contributing code, I am just wishing to keep up to
> date with NT domain login stuff.
> Thanks.

If you want to stay on the "bleeding" edge - then just
keep checking out of the HEAD branch (cvs update -d -P -A).

Many people on this list have CVS checkin access to
the Samba tree though, and all of the fixes that have
been made in responses to bugs people have reported 
with the beta1 code have been made into the HEAD branch,
which is good (they need to be there). It's just
that the HEAD branch isn't what gets released as "stable"
code - the SAMBA_2_0 branch is used for that, so all
these fixes need to be made in *both* places.

BTW: To the people who made those changes, I've
already added them to the 2.0 branch so this is 
an informational message for future changes :-).


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

More information about the samba-technical mailing list