pdbsql external project: https://sourceforge.net/projects/pdbsql

[Florian Effenberger]

Hi Jerry,

thank you for your message and for your help regarding the pdb_sql module.

As you have noticed, I have set up a SourceForge project called pdbsql, 
where developers interested in the pdb_sql module can join in.

My primary goal is to have a pdb_sql module available for all future 
versions of Samba 3.x. Currently, I do NOT plan having a module 
available for Samba 4. Samba 4 will be a transition, and I think 
switching to LDAP at least then would be a good idea. However, I'll - of 
course - leave the final decision up to the module maintainers.

The SF.net site as of today is a little bit empty, but I hope to get it 
filled very soon. I have set-up a mailing list 
pdbsql-devel at lists.sf.net, which I'm CC'ing to this message. The list 
should act as a coordination possibility between the pdb_sql 
maintainers. I have invited all known interested parties (from Bugzilla) 
to this list, so it's easy to reach everyone.

I have NOT send out list invitations to Samba developers, as you told 
you have no ressources to contribute there, and I thought it would be a 
good idea to save space on your inbox. :-) However, if you would like to 
look at the development or even support us, I'd be glad to see you 
subscribing!

> We will continue to do 3.0.x releases.  For example, 3.0.22
> will be the next upgrade release.  3.0.21c will be a patch
> release for 3.0.21.  Any security releases for 3.0.x will
> eat a minor number.  So if there were a security release
> for 3.0.21[a-z], that would take the place of 3.0.22 and
> the code which was to become 3.0.22 would be pushed to 3.0.23.

In 3.0.21b, the pdb_sql module is still contained. If you release 
3.0.22, it will be removed. What happens should there be a 3.0.21c? It 
would then still be included, right? What happens should you release 
3.0.23 and 3.0.24 and then a security issue pops up that affects all 
Samba versions down to, let's say, 3.0.11. Then there would be no 
security release for a pdb_sql-capable version, is this correct?

I'm just asking to know on how to coordinate and calculate.

> (a) create a mailing list to replace the samba-pdbsql mail
> alias on samba.org (so you can manage list membership easier).
> I will then point the alias at your ml.

Can you (off-list) send me the recipients list for samba-pdbsql? Then I 
can merge it with pdbsql-devel at lists.sf.net and then the latter one can 
act as a primary distribution point for contacting the pdb_sql developers.

Is it possible to have samba-pdbsql changed to pdbsql-devel at lists.sf.net 
in Bugzilla? If so, how? Then we could release the samba-pdbsql alias. 
Otherwise, please point samba-pdbsql to pdbsql-devel and let me know 
which address(es) I should add as allowed poster, so Bugzilla and Samba 
mails get through.

> (b) Get a build working again 3.0.21 (outside the samba tree)
> to fix any existing bugs.

Right now, I have the diff for the modules available from the svn 
command Volker Lendecke posted.

First, I would like to clean out the xml parts, as we (at least 
currently) do not work on the XML module anymore. That should be fairly 
easy, I think.

How do things then go on? Will there be a 3.0.21 release available w/o 
pdb_sql support so we can check whether the patch can be applied? Or 
shall we wait until 3.0.22 and then try to 1. get it applied 2. fix bugs 
related to passdb backend changes?

I'm fairly new on software development, so if you could shed a light, 
that would be much appreciated!

> (c) Start focusing on making sure that you have a version
> that builds against 3.0.22 and passes any regression tests
> you have.

What would you prefer as a way of coordinating things? I thought of 
having main development occur on sf.net and having pdbsql-devel as the 
main list for development. From time to time, I would report news to 
samba-technical, and hope that you let us know things that could affect 
the pdbsql backend, so we can have a "gateway" between the Samba core 
team and us through this. I urged all pdbsqsl developers to subscribe to 
samba-technical as well.

Regarding Bugzilla: Shall we use the one on samba.org, or shall we move 
to SF.net?

> After the first two things are completed, you might want to
> announce the project on the samba ml.  We could also run
> a news item on news.samba.org once you have a successful
> release.

Thanks, that sounds like a good deal! I really hope we can keep the 
module in production.

Looking forward on working with you, and again, thanks for all of your 
support, this is much appreciated!

Florian