To release Samba 4.0 'as is'
mat at samba.org
Wed Nov 30 03:12:09 MST 2011
>> (If this is the default, then I think it should not be a problem
>> to also keep the s4 fileserver part (at least for a while) so that
>> it can be enabled if desired.)
> What does that mean in practice? If that code is available
> in the build, people will enable it. What happens if bugs
> pop up then? Will we tell people this is an unsupported
Why not ? up to 3.5 or 3.6 the user_xattr module in samba3 was marked as
experimental I'm not sure that Sernet was ok to support it fanatically.
Here you are 99,9% sure that every persons who are paying for support
won't use it in production, for the happy few that want to use it ...
well I guess it's a question of money if they want it for free they'll
be pretty ok for no/low support. It's not like if other company with a
much higher firepower (I'm thinking at M.......t) release some very
useful tools but they clearly state that it's without support.
If the ntvfs fileserver is not the default then nearly nobody will use
it, screaming about this is a relevant as someone did a couple of years
ago when samba 3.5 shipped with an outdated version of samba4.
> or will we put the same energy into fixing those
> bugs in the S4 file server component that we put into the S3
> file server?
> The first option ruins our reputation, the
> second one just overloads us. I don't thing any of those two
> alternatives is acceptable for us.
Which energy are we speaking here ? There is bugs lying around in our
bugzilla for ages as a matter of fact those of us paid for the support
will focus first on bugs reported by a customer for the rest I think we
do our best, but it's just a best effort.
It seems that it's clear that tridge wants to keep the ntvfs fileserver
and it's clear to me that he is ok to do the support for it, I
personally don't see it as a problem as it won't be by default so bugs
report will be pretty rare and even not perfect the ntvfs fileserver
didn't received so much bug reports lately so I really don't see it as a
huge threat for our reputation nor a huge risk of overloading us.
More information about the samba-technical