CVS update: tng/source/passdb

[Elrond]

On Tue, Jan 08, 2002 at 10:51:08AM +0000, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
[...]
> > Could some of the people who are working on TNG 
> 
> there aren't any people working on TNG, andrew.
> 
> elrond has about one hour a day to spare, which he uses

Right.



> to review patches and code-diffs dating back one year,
> some of them, and update appropriate ones that are
> self-contained and not a lot of work.

Not really correct.

Currently I'm using it to read this *censored* discussion.
All that hour goes into it.
Great way to stop me from even reviewing Peter's great
commits.

And when I get to coding (mostly at home), I'm sometimes
trying to merge some stuff from head. But I'm ever and ever
getting more tired of it.
Or I'm trying to clean the code.
Or trying to fix problems reported by our few users.



> peter does makefile, autoconf and option-related
> maintenance.

And he does a great job. :)


> that's it, i'm sorry to have to say.

Right.


> > comment on if they
> > think this approach would be useful? 
> 
> > Do you even care any more about
> > being able to run your pipes in non-TNG Samba? 

To be honest. I don't care much about head any more. I
consider it to be a file server, that's it.

It can be installed as a domain member and that's the nice
way to run it.

In my production environment, I'm even a step "further".
I use a normal nt4 _workstation_ as our
file/printserver.
This approach probably saved me a whole lot of headaches.


> yes.
> 
> the purpose of this approach is to allow us to
> drop samba-tng completely and to use freedce,
> wholesale, instead.
[...]


On the one side. I have to consent.

And it would get me finaly to look at freedce (I really
want to, but I just didn't find the time.).

On the other hand, I don't want to drop samba TNG. I know
its code now quite well and every time I look at head,
hmm... I'll comment on that in another mail.


> > The Samba HEAD code will probably get a more general purpose modules
> > interface in the next couple of weeks anyway, as we want to be able to
> > load things like auth modules. I've discussed the details of this with
> > a few team members to try to get a decent API and I think the design
> > is coming along quite nicely. It is basically the same as the
> > init_module()/register_SUBSYSTEM() method that the Linux kernel uses.
> > 
> > So if somebody does want to write a TNG glue module then they should
> > find it quite easy to do once this module interface is in place.
> 
> there is nobody available to do that, andrew.
[...]

Right.


    Elrond