The Wrapper Project

Jeremy Allison jra at
Wed Nov 20 14:46:45 MST 2013

On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 04:26:15PM -0500, Simo wrote:
> We have *too much* code already, we can hardly handle what we have.
> We should be happy to give away stuff so we can keep our attention on
> what matters.

+1000 This, this a thousand times this ! :-).

> And this is one of those cases, there are other projects that can
> greatly benefit from this infrastructure to the point that Andreas took
> the code and already greatly improved it. And they can benefit samba in
> return by improving on it and giving back fixes and maintenance, it is
> only *fair* that the project resides on "neutral ground" in its own
> repo. If the other projects were to reason the same way they would
> simply take a copy and go their way and give nothing back. That is not
> how you collaborate and share the burden for the benefit of a larger
> community.

I'm guessing the reluctance on this may stem from the problem
we had with ctdb, which was spun out too soon and now has had
to return. With adequate maintanence and use in other projects
I don't think this is going to be a problem with the wrapper code.

Looking at this from a practical standpoint. It's clear that
this is a done deal. Andreas already has forked this code and
it's already out on its own and will be used elsewhere.

The question is do we rely on an out-of-date version in our
tree that I don't think it's fair to ask Andreas to maintain
in addition to the external project, or do we work with a
version that is being actively maintained and developed.

I know which I'd rather have :-).

> Let it go, this code is not *so critical* that if lives somewhere else
> it is the end of the world.

Hahahaha :-). Peace man, let the kids leave home... :-).


More information about the samba-technical mailing list