samba4 / samba-tool patches, patch 0000 of 0002
thallora at linux.vnet.ibm.com
Thu May 19 08:34:31 MDT 2011
On 5/18/2011 11:51 PM, Andrew Bartlett wrote:
> Thanks for that.
> A few points:
> Firstly, I'm sorry, but this will be a bit of a difficult process while
> you get used to how we prefer patches, and as we sort out the details.
I assumed this would be true ... the code changes I'm working on are
intentionally rather simple,
which gives me an opportunity to learn the process. I appreciate your
> On the patches, please don't leave in the old code commented out - GIT
> keeps a history, so we don't need a history left in the code. I also
> disagree with leaving in a 'redirection' in the old command, we are
> still in alpha releases and I fear we will never get rid of the old
> names otherwise.
Ok, I will delete old code, rather than comment out.
Ok, I will remove the two parts, enableaccount.py and setexpiry.py, as
they are no longer
> I also don't think it should be 'enableaccount', but just 'samba tool
> user enable'.
Ok, I agree that is better. I will update the code and the wiki.
> Also, in your GIT configuration you should put your full name, as that
> will be the permanent 'Author' marker for the code.
Yes, I forgot quotes in my environment variable setting........
> (I also think the bike-shed should be blue ;-)
> Andrew Bartlett
I will put out new patches soon. I will re-do the patches rather than
just adding another patch,
since i think it easier to review that way (and since the work item is
I guess I can pose that as a question.....do you usually just re-do the
patches for re-review when needed?
or add patches on top of existing patch. I think the latter would be
hard to review. I realize in this
case its simple since the work item is so minor, so I ask the question
as a general procedural one.
More information about the samba-technical