dce/rpc "client" api

[Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton]

> archives for details. As technical lead and chief architect
                           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> of Samba it is his decision to make, and I concurr with it.
     ^^^^^

samba, if you recall, is just a file and print server.

andrew has been busy, if you recall, with other things.

i therefore beg to differ on your interpretation.

i could put this more plainly, but am reluctant to do so as i do not see
it as my place to do so: with no formal recognition and trust placed in
me, which is a _separate issue_ from a technical requirement to prove the
value of any work and ideas, for which i agree with you and andrew that
andrew stands as the only person to make the decisions about what does and
does not go into samba, with andrew being the primary maintainer of samba.

suffice to say, there have been a number of instances where those people,
including yourself, jeremy, who have not kept up to speed in the areas i
have been focussing on specialising in, and who have been focussing and
specialising in other areas of samba's development, for which i _do_
complement and recognise yours, and their, dedication.

the consequences of the failure to recognise this have been, so far, as
far as i recognise:

- constant dismissal of ideas and work i come up with

- lack of understanding and appreciation of the complexities involved,
leading to attempts to reinvent work _already done_

- differing aims and goals for the direction of samba's development

- reversals on design decisions as the failure to recognise the value of
my suggestions usually requires other people - sometimes customers - to
come up with justification for the implementation of the design decisions.
svcctld is a good example of this.


so now you have a summary of the main reasons why i do not wish to fight
any more for continuing to help with samba's development.  the primary one
being that i find it quite offensive and discouraging to have work
dismissed and reimplemented without consideration to the value of the
implementation already there as a basis for continued development.  after
four years, i should have realised this a long, long time ago.

all best,

lukes