The BackupKey Saga (blog post)

[Andrew Bartlett]

On Fri, 2015-09-04 at 21:34 -0500, Scott Lovenberg wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 3, 2015 at 8:59 PM, Andrew Bartlett <abartlet at samba.org>
> wrote:
> > For those interested in how we fixed bug
> > https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11097 which was raised
> > with
> > credentials manager started to fail after KB2992611, you might be
> > interested in another blog post I wrote up for work:
> > 
> > https://www.catalyst.net.nz/blog/backupkey-saga-samba-triage-and-de
> > velopment-deadline
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > 
> > Andrew Bartlett
> > 
> 
> 
> Great post!  I correct a project manager just today in the context of
> a 'black box' service owned by another team that, for one reason or
> another, won't provide us with documentation on the system; he stated
> that any documentation is better than none.  I agreed with the caveat
> that the documentation is correct, otherwise I'd rather have none at
> all!

I certainly appreciate the sentiment.  In this case, and with much of
Samba, I would generally prefer the reverse:  That is, the partial and
often incorrect documentation can be turned into a hypothesis to be
tested.  Because we take an approach akin to the famous 'trust but
verify', we have a method for sifting out the truth.  Even the
apparently false statements give a great structure for making
enquiries, such as by packet analysis, more network based testing or
mailing dochelp.

Thanks,

Andrew Bartlett

-- 
Andrew Bartlett                       http://samba.org/~abartlet/
Authentication Developer, Samba Team  http://samba.org
Samba Developer, Catalyst IT          http://catalyst.net.nz/services/samba