Is there a reason to have source4 in 3.4 releases?

Derrell Lipman derrell.lipman at
Wed Jul 15 07:56:47 MDT 2009

On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 7:47 AM, Michael Adam <obnox at> wrote:

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

Although I can laugh at Andrew's comment about danger dragons, I don't think
the situation is quite that dire. Currently there is nothing in the naming
to indicate how "ready" or "released" samba4 is in relation to samba3
(except, of course, that it's part of the samba3 release tarball). I like
the current trend towards Frankie included in the releases. I'd suggest
simply renaming the samba4 directory, in master and 3.4 branches, to
samba4-prerelease or samba4-work-in-progress or even
samba4-prerelease-work-in-progress (the latter is probably overzealous) just
so it's clear that the samba4 code is not yet production ready. We will
likely still get occasional questions about it, but at least they're well
fore-warned. When samba4/Frankie is ready for a real release, the directory
can be renamed back to samba4.


More information about the samba-technical mailing list