To release Samba 4.0 'as is'

Gémes Géza geza at
Thu Nov 24 23:07:34 MST 2011

2011-11-25 02:27 keltezéssel, Andrew Bartlett írta:
> On Wed, 2011-11-23 at 16:23 -0500, simo wrote:
>> On Tue, 2011-11-22 at 17:13 +1100, Andrew Bartlett wrote:
>>> What do others think?
>> I think this plan makes no sense.
>> Dropping an alpha release on the floor and slapping the "stable" sticker
>> on it is not what our users expect.
> Simo,
> I think you have seriously misunderstood my proposal.  As a Software
> Engineer, I do not drop releases on the floor and call them "stable".
> I'm more than happy to continue to make alpha releases, but what I'm
> suggesting is that we gather our current state, and proceed in an
> orderly fashion to a beta or pre-release, without first making major 
> architectural changes.  In short I'm suggesting that now is a good 
> time for a feature freeze.
>> I no way the waf build is currently usable in production for the file
>> server part.
> Can you please tell me what specifically is unsuitable about the smbd or
> samba file server under the waf build?
>> Many have chimed here so I will not repeat all the very sane points made
>> by a great number of people, please listen to them and do not just
>> dismiss their concern. They may be related to specific issues that may
>> look minor to you. But I assure you they are definitely not.
> I've seen a number of concerns, and I've asked for them to be spelled
> out, some in technical detail.  I'll patiently wait for those technical
> details, so I can address those which I am able, because with specific 
> issues we can take specific action.
>> We are the people that will have to *support* whatever is dropped out
>> there. And we want to be comfortable we *can* do that job. We currently
>> can't without still great pains.
> I have no intention to 'drop' anything 'out there'.  I would like to
> propose that the team move to a feature freeze, and then a beta or
> pre-release.  
> In terms of support, I and others working on the AD components have
> carried the support for those components for quite some time now, and
> I'm sure that will continue.
>> Any regressions in the build system or in the file server functionality
>> is not acceptable. 
> Are there any current regressions I should be aware of?
> Andrew Bartlett
As someone who followed closely this thread and being personally
interested in the AD part, but not only (currently running a Samba4 AD
test domain, will need to introduce it in production before summer). I
would propose an intermediate solution to the extremes presented on this
Call the Samba 4.0 release Samba-AD (the idea behind the name belongs to
Sernet people), and continue to release Samba3 as Samba-FS. This way
people would have a suggestion where those are going to be deployable.
Of course I DON'T propose the end of the integration efforts. But if the
plan is to do a release in the near future that seems a good (certainly
not perfect) compromise. Having a Samba release with ability to act as
an AD DC is becoming more and more important to many people who have to
upgrade their network infrastructure.



More information about the samba-technical mailing list