[Samba] Is 2.2.6 Final?

[Markus Schabel]

Andrew Bartlett wrote:

>Markus Schabel wrote:
>  
>
>>John H Terpstra wrote:
>>
>>    
>>
>>>On Mon, 28 Oct 2002, William Jojo wrote:
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>>Just tought I'd follow up and see if 2.2.6 is truly the last release of
>>>>samba_2_2 CVS branch.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>Yes, 2.2.6 is the latest stable release.
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>So there will never be a stable samba again? ;)
>>    
>>
>
>:-)
>
great, at least one realized that this was a joke ;)

>>>We hope that this will be our
>>>last update. All samba-team resources are now focussing on getting 3.0.0
>>>readt for release. Right now 3.0.0 is still changing significantly and we
>>>would not recommend it's use in a production environment.
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>>We've got six systems running it with no visible issues.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>If it is not broken then why fix it?
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>the last version I had problems with was 2.2.3a (on a SuSE system) and
>>2.2.4 (there were problems with LDAP, all solved since 2.2.5)
>>
>>    
>>
>>>>I'm currently testing CVS from Sunday's pull of 3.0...is this the
>>>>direction I should be heading?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>Yes. But do your home work. Test, test, test, and give us feedback.
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>I'm currently working on a PDC for about 300 LDAP-based users, I guess
>>with LDAP there is no problem when migrating to 3.0? Probably I'll run
>>the actual CVS parallel....
>>    
>>
>
>Depending on how you also use LDAP, there are some good reasons to move
>to 3.0.  In HEAD, pdb_ldap now has connection caching, and does not
>modify unchanged attributes (these benefits provided by metze, who has
>the significant advantage of using samba on a large and complex ldap
>infrastructure). 
>
I'm not sure if this is helpful when replicating the complete Directory 
to the Samba-Server, but at least it sounds good.

>We hope to move this stuff into the next 3.0 alpha.
>
>Samba 3.0 also adds 'ldap passwd sync', to help keep the LDAP and SMB
>passwords in sync.
>
I guess that's really helpful for us.

Do the computer accounts still need to be full posix users? It would 
simplify things a bit if not.

regards
Markus