smbd/source3 or ntvfs/source4 for new VFS module development?
jra at samba.org
Thu Jan 28 17:45:41 UTC 2016
On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 09:58:42PM +1300, Andrew Bartlett wrote:
> I know you would love to get out the pitchforks, but I would be much
> happier if we kept with the current state where it is disabled in
> default production builds, but is still kept building for developers
> and working with the testsuite.
I don't like that as it confuses OEMs and can give them
false hope that this will be simple (I know as I've just
had to deal with that :-).
> For one thing it is still the only part of Samba with the CIFS proxy
> just discussed.
Now *that* is a good reason to keep it around, but
it's the only one I can see so far.
More information about the samba-technical