Is there a reason to have source4 in 3.4 releases?

Michael Adam obnox at
Wed Jul 15 05:47:34 MDT 2009

Andrew Bartlett wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-07-15 at 13:20 +0200, Michael Adam wrote:
> > 
> > > Is there any reason for the source4 tree to be released in Samba 3.4
> > > releases?  Users of Samba4 from that branch are only going to be
> > > disappointed (as it is will be an increasingly older snapshot), and the
> > > work for 'Franky' and other combined tree efforts is occouring in
> > > master, not the 3.4 release tree.
> > 
> > It is certainly right that the development continues in master,
> > but with 3.4 including source4/ you _can_ do a merged build, and build the
> > smbtorture4 tool, for instance.
> I hadn't thought about smbtorture4.  That makes things more complicated.

Well it is just very convenient.
Users of a samba3 release tarball could never create a samba4
torture so easily before. It is by no means a requirement.
Neither has smbtorture4 been officially released as a part of
the samba3 suite.

> > It could of course have been made even clearer that
> > the release refers to the source3/ subtree.
> > But well it is a Samba3 release, so it should actually
> > be pretty obvious.
> Sadly, what is obvious to us is far from to users.

This is unfortunate.
It was definitely not the intention to create the illusion
that samba4 had been released as part of the samba 3.4 release.
It was definitely not meant to put strain on you!
I am sorry if this is the case.

> You could label the folder 'danger-dragons-never-ever-touch'
> and still have people ask about it.


Well, taking it positively, this increases the visibility of
Samba4 among the users of samba(3) out there, and even increases
the demand for a finished Samba AD domain controller!

> > If we should decide to remove the source4/ tree, we would
> > also have to change samba3's configure to not touch it at all
> > (remove merged build and so on).
> I would strongly support that.  It would be unfortunate if more folks
> started asking us to support this 'release', when for the Samba4 side of
> things it's nothing more than an old snapshot.

No, we have to tell them clearly that there is no samba4 release
within the s3 tarball to be supported. For the decision about the
removal of the source4 tree from 3.4.1, others should raise their
voices. I personally have not problem with it sticking there, but
when people agree that it is irritating and misleading, then it
should probably go.

Cheers - Michael

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 206 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <>

More information about the samba-technical mailing list