The Wrapper Project

Andreas Schneider asn at
Tue Dec 3 01:03:49 MST 2013

On Tuesday 03 December 2013 06:49:13 Volker Lendecke wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 03, 2013 at 12:44:21AM +0100, Andreas Schneider wrote:
> > Yes, if the there are enough unit tests. nss_wrapper is at 75%,
> > uid_wrapper is at 69%, the rest is easy.
> > 
> > The big step is to get socket_wrapper form 1% to at least 75%.
> > 
> > Testings ensures that they are working as expected and we don't regress in
> > future. The more people are using it, the better testing and testcases we
> > get.
> > 
> > And that's the goal. At least for me!
> Isn't one huge aspect of this whole thing that Samba does
> not use cmake but a home-grown build system based on the waf
> toolkit? If we had cmake, wouldn't you be happier to develop
> the wrappers in-tree?

No, I don't like the in-tree Samba development.

* It is much harder to follow the history of a small library.
* It is often harder to do backports.
* Sometimes someone just changes something but then doesn't do a release.
* It is easier to encourage someone to use it if it is a smaller tree.
* It is easier for developers to follow the development. If it is in the Samba
  tree you have to follow a huge patchstream.

Most of this is from the pain I had as a packager and maintainer of software 
in an enterprise distribution.

	-- andreas

More information about the samba-technical mailing list