Name Change for Samba4? [Re: What is blocking a Samba4 Tech Preview?]

[tridge at samba.org]

Volker,

 > > Comparing lines of code is not a good criterion, as you can see from
 > > the above.
 > 
 > Sorry (I should keep out of this), but Simo told on irc that you will remove
 > the 'valid users' parameter and friends. To my customers this is a huge change.

I don't think that the inclusion/exclusion of the 'valid users' is a
good criterion for choosing a package name either :-)

Personally I think that 'valid users' or something very much like it
should be kept, though I think it should be changed to accept both
SIDs and names (along with all the other places we have 'lists of
users/groups'). I haven't discussed this with Simo though and perhaps
he has some very good reason for not supporting that particular
option. Simo, maybe you could explain why you think we shouldn't
support that option?

To me valid users is much like 'read only = yes/no' and other
"override" options on shares. They give a nice course grained override
that is easy to setup in smb.conf.

The disadvantage of the 'valid users' option is that it is so
inefficient. To honor it properly you have to canonicalise every one
of the names in the list (as a single user in ADS can have multiple
forms to their name), which is potentially quite expensive. I don't
think this is a good enough reason to not support it though, as only
people who set a 'valid users' line will pay that price.

Cheers, Tridge