[Samba] s3fs proposal

[Andrew Bartlett]

On Sat, 2012-04-28 at 12:31 +0200, steve wrote:
> Hi
> How about calling s3fs, s4fs?
> Cheers,
> Steve

Steve,

The 's3fs' proposal you refer to is documented at
https://wiki.samba.org/index.php/Samba4/s3fs

I hope I've clarified it with this comment in the wiki:

Why is this called s3fs?
There isn't a very good reason for the name, except that the original
proponents needed a name, and the linker-tricks needed by the previous
effort codenamed s3compat are no longer required. It was therefore
desired to have a name that communicated that this is about using the
smbd file server from the Samba 3.x release stream. 

For a number of years now, two file servers have been developed in
parallel in the Samba project. The Samba 3.x releases produced the smbd
file server, while the Samba 4.x alpha series had the ntvfs file server.
Therefore, s3fs simply indicates that, integrated into the samba process
used by the AD DC is the file server refined in the Samba 3.x release
series.

It is hoped that this detail and name would not need to be exposed to
users by the time that Samba 4.x is released, while we continue to
refine the development and implementation details of this process.


In terms of a codename s4fs, that would imply a DC based on the ntvfs
file server, which is what we have agreed to change to be the
non-default option. 

I hope this clarifies things,

Andrew Bartlett

-- 
Andrew Bartlett                                http://samba.org/~abartlet/
Authentication Developer, Samba Team           http://samba.org