transitioning release management

simo idra at
Thu Feb 28 01:04:34 GMT 2008

On Wed, 2008-02-27 at 20:01 -0500, Derrell Lipman wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 7:25 PM, simo <idra at> wrote:
> >  Derrell,
> >  my fear is that not adding the functionality you make a huge bet on the
> >  fact you'll get the API/ABI right.
> >  If you find out the new API/ABI does not fit future functionality you
> >  will have to break it again. And that would not be painless.
> >
> >  How confident are you that you will get it right ?
> That's a reasonable fear.  I'm actually fairly confident though.  My
> changes are to make the internal workings more (nearly completely)
> opaque, meaning that future changes don't affect the ABI at all.  The
> API can then be extended (new functions) but should not need to be
> changed in a non-backward-compatible manner any time in the near
> future.  I'm perfectly happy (eager, in fact) to have others' eyes on
> these changes to make sure I'm not missing anything, but this is
> fairly straight forward stuff even though the patch will appear huge.
> >  I agree that a major release is a perfect time to do an API change, but
> >  we are planning also to release by April and there are a tons of things
> >  to test already. This also weighs in in making me nervous of doing this
> >  change right now.
> Understandable.  I'll keep working on this until I'm told that it's a
> no-go.  Hopefully I won't have wasted my time, but I'd rather work on
> it now with the expectation that it'll be able to go in, rather than
> forever have to deal with the status quo. :-)

Seem reasonable.
If you come up with something that is ok with also adding async
capabilities then it would be great.


Simo Sorce
Samba Team GPL Compliance Officer <simo at>
Senior Software Engineer at Red Hat Inc. <ssorce at>

More information about the samba-technical mailing list