svn commit: samba r4925 - branches/SAMBA_3_0/examples/LDAP branches/SAMBA_3_0/source branches/SAMBA_3_0/source/include branches/SAMBA_3_0/source/lib branches/SAMBA_3_0/source/passdb branches/SAMBA_3_0/source/rpc_server branches/SAMBA_3_0/source/smbd branches/SAMBA_3_0/source/utils trunk/examples/LDAP trunk/source trunk/source/include trunk/source/lib trunk/source/passdb trunk/source/rpc_server trunk/source/smbd trunk/source/utils

Guenther Deschner gd at
Tue Jan 25 11:04:52 GMT 2005

Hi Jerry,

On Mon, Jan 24, 2005 at 12:22:31PM -0600, Gerald (Jerry) Carter wrote:
> Since we have a small list of acocunt policies and I
> can't see that growing to huge amounts, I was thinking
> of just having an attribute per policy included the
> sambaDomain object.  The descriptive string for each
> policy should be hard-coded in smbd IMO.

Could you possible outline the layout you have in mind? I still don't see
how that could be integrated, you don't want an new attribute for each
policy, do you? On the other hand: admins would no longer able to play with
sambaAccountPolicyName. That would be better. We could include the
comments then hardcoded in the DESC-field of the attribute-definition.

> btw...would you mind if we did not include this in 3.0.11?
> But a later release?  Once it makes it into the release,
> we have to live with it (and worry about interface changes).

Sure. It's your decision. Sorry for the "raid commit", btw. I just didn't
wanted it be lost in space.

> And I'm just not 100% convinced that this is the final
> destination yet.

Ok, so I'm very interested to see what your sam-repl-plans are for it :)


Guenther Deschner                                               Samba Team
SerNet GmbH - Goettingen                                      gd at samba,org
gd at
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url :

More information about the samba-technical mailing list