[Release Planning 4.1] Delaying 4.1.0?

Karolin Seeger kseeger at samba.org
Mon Sep 16 10:17:33 CEST 2013


On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 09:53:17AM +0200, Karolin Seeger wrote:
> One week left until freeze.
> It looks like we at least need another release candidate.
> Currently, it does not look like rc3 could be shipped on September 11,
> which still is the planned release date for Samba 4.1.0 final.

Samba 4.1.0rc3 has been released on September 11. The next 4.1 release is
scheduled for Friday, September 27. That means, the release branches will
be frozen on Friday, September 20 (in four days).

List of current blockers:
- https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8077
  userParameters needs to be stored as utf8
  Metze wrote: "Is a real bad bug, I'd wait till the last minute before
  deferring it, but it'll require a lot of work to fix this :-("

- https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8487
  We should not allow the modification of systemOnly attributes
  Metze wrote: "Has a patchset that needs verification
  and maybe a bit more work. We may be able to move this to 4.2 if it
  requires a lot of work."

- https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8929
  correct "servicePrincipalName" handling
  Patches available, review needed.

- https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9654
  pwdLastSet broken (allowing passwords that never expire)
  Metze wrote: "Doesn't look to hard to fix,
  but we may be able to move this to 4.2 if it requires a more of work."
  I would love to have this one fixed for 4.1.0, but it does not seem like
  someone is working on this one.

The following patches went into the branch since rc3:
- c4166d04: dbwrap_ctdb: Treat empty records as non-existing

- 3f749acd, 434ca3fe, 69cf8747, ebfa34b3: Ease file server upgrades from 3.6
  and earlier with "acl allow execute always".

- def64cc7: Raise the level of a debug.

- 2907f0f23: s3:smb2_find: Return that timestamps do not exist as
  (autobuild pending) 

Shall we
a) go ahead with the final release, or
b) ship rc4 on September 27, or
c) b) + wait until all blockers are fixed.

Me personally, I would prefer a) in this case.

Comments welcome!


Samba			http://www.samba.org
SerNet			http://www.sernet.de
sambaXP			http://www.sambaxp.org

More information about the samba-technical mailing list