Is there a reason to have source4 in 3.4 releases?

[Andrew Bartlett]

On Thu, 2009-08-20 at 10:33 +0200, Karolin Seeger wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 05:58:16PM +1000, Andrew Bartlett wrote:
> > My preference would be for both the above (in GIT) and to remove the
> > source4 from the releases. 
> 
> I am sorry, but I would strongly argue against removing source4 in a minor
> release. For 3.5 that wouldn't be a problem, but not for 3.4.

Why?  If our users notice, it actually means that we have the problem
that we are trying to avoid.  

That is, either nobody (developers running 'make test' as a QA measure
excepted) is using source4, then nobody should notice.

Alternately, if anybody is using the code in source4, and it matters to
them that it's removed, then that implies that they are expecting that
we will provide support, security updates and stability promises for
that code.  

(I hope it's clear that we cannot provide those promises for a now
6-month old snapshot of Samba4).

I am very much looking forward to making releases of Samba4 - and hope
to get to a 'beta' in the near future - but we are not at this point
now. 

Andrew Bartlett
-- 
Andrew Bartlett
http://samba.org/~abartlet/
Authentication Developer, Samba Team           http://samba.org
Samba Developer, Cisco Inc.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.samba.org/pipermail/samba-technical/attachments/20090820/1b7f19eb/attachment.pgp>