Where to for Samba4?

[paul]

Andrew Bartlett schrieb:
> On Fri, 2007-09-07 at 06:17 -0400, Adam Tauno Williams wrote:
>>> The goals you mentioned in your previews mail perfectly match a project
>>> name of "samba4dc", and it would make a lot of sense to have something
>>> like this.
>> A Samba 4 that can do what Samba 3 can't seems more important than a
>> Samba 4 that can do everything Samba 3 can;  since there is a Samba 3.
>> Running an NT4 domain almost gets more painful by the day,  and if I or
>> anyone else has to give up and switch to AD it is going to be a hard
>> fight to come *back* to Samba.  But without some confident sounding
>> "release" most people aren't going to touch Samba 4.
> 
> I was wondering why I have this gut feeling against the samba4AD
> tagging, and perhaps this is it.  We need Samba4 to look and position
> like a serious release, or else it won't be.  
Ok this is marketing, but still...

IMO you have two choices:

1. samba4 is the successor of samba3, people are supposed to *upgrade* 
from samba3 to samba4. This requires samba4 to implement *all* of 
samba3, otherwise the "upgrade story" is a lie ;)

2. samba4 is somewhat "standalone", it implements the AD logon protocols 
and is primarily targeted at being an AD DC. Here the "story" is about 
different roles of samba3 and samba4, which are supposed to coexist. IMO 
it is not that hard to give such a scenario a positive spin, given 
microsofts own efforts to decouple functionality in server 2008 ;)

cheers
  Paul