[SAMBA 4] How to proceed?

[Nadezhda Ivanova]

Hi,
What about Kludge ACLs? 

-----Original Message-----
From: Andrew Bartlett [mailto:abartlet at samba.org] 
Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2008 9:14 AM
To: Matthias Dieter Wallnöfer
Cc: 'samba-technical at lists.samba.org'
Subject: Re: [SAMBA 4] How to proceed?

On Sat, 2008-09-06 at 15:03 +0200, Matthias Dieter Wallnöfer wrote:
> Dear SAMBA community!
> 
> I've been a SAMBA 4 tester for a year now. Recently, I've discussed with 
> Andrew Bartlett in private about ideas how we could/should continue our 
> work towards the next SAMBA 4 releases. We agreed that SAMBA 4 certainly 
> will have a future in the "Franky" hybrid framework, but also as a 
> standalone software.
> Since the software seems to be stable in many areas, it doesn't make 
> much sense to leave it in the alpha stage. So I'd like to see the next 
> release as a beta.
> I also worried with Andrew about how we could change it so, that people 
> is willing to use it. I've prepared a list of theses to consider:
> 
>     * Standalone server support: There should be implemented a kind of
>       NTFS-POSIX ACL mapping to finish this one. But generally, the
>       fileserver should be nearly feature-complete now.

I think this is the single biggest blocker we have to sensible use of
samba4.  If someone wishes to take this task on, it will be most
welcome.

>     * Replication: According to Andrew ok.
>     * Packaging: The effort to prepare packages for diffused
>       distributions should continue.
>     * Compatibility with OpenChange: Much work has been done.

On the contrary, OpenChange uses the current tree unmodified.  I don't
know of any more issues they have with our infrastructure at this
point. 

>     * Stable database formats
>     * Fix problems with the build system: I've in mind the problem with
>       the uninstallation
>       (https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5678). Through the
>       next versions we may have also a look at
>       https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4081 (Building outside
>       source directory).
> 
> Smaller issues:
> 
>     * LDB async rewrite: Is there a plan to finish it?
>     * Registry backend: I've prepared a set of patches to fix the server
>       side up. I hope they will be pushed soon.
>     * Printer support: For now I wouldn't implement it.
> 
> I see this email as an expression of my (and partially Andrew's) 
> opinions and as a base to discuss and comment on. Please do so!

To make this concrete - I want to use this to define a path to a beta -
so if your pet 'must be in Samba4 before we call this a beta' is not on
the above list, or already implemented, then speak now...

Other features that I think are required before a release is made would
be: 

Trusted domain support - at least at the KDC and inbound level (outbound
trusts imply a better functioning winbindd than we have to hand). 

I also agree that we should fix up the IPv6 situation, but this is
always seems to be trickier than one would prefer...

Andrew Bartlett

-- 
Andrew Bartlett
http://samba.org/~abartlet/
Authentication Developer, Samba Team           http://samba.org
Samba Developer, Red Hat Inc.