ab at samba.org
Thu Jun 22 05:46:08 GMT 2006
James Peach пишет:
> On Wed, 2006-06-21 at 17:06 -0500, Gerald (Jerry) Carter wrote:
>>> SWAT would be ok for the first consumer / to polish the API.
>> Please...no. We need an API that will get used. SWAT has its
>> fingers in everything and is just broken as a management tool.
> Agreed. I'm all for ditching SWAT. There's an ocean of management
> tools out there, both open source and proprietary. IMHO, providing a
> rich management interface for these is of more value than supporting
So, let me round up this discussion:
1. Reviving SWAT in Samba 3 is pointless.
2. Better to concentrate on API for external management tools
3. Such an API is actually a set of MSRPC interfaces, including registry
4. Encapsulating those interfaces into a sort of library and providing
its bindings for popular scripting languages (Perl, Python, etc) is seem
of better value.
5. Additionally, local operation via Unix socket is probably a good
thing as user of that library and probably will be subject to test via
/ Alexander Bokovoy
Samba Team http://www.samba.org/
ALT Linux Team http://www.altlinux.org/
Midgard Project Ry http://www.midgard-project.org/
More information about the samba-technical