Laurent Blume <laur...@opencsw.org> writes:

> On 2013-09-02 7:15 PM, slowfranklin wrote:
>> Well, Samba 4.0 is the current *stable* Samba release series. 
>
> Yup, but 3.6 is still actively maintained (and 3.5 too for security,
> actually).
>
>> But we can tell people: why are you sticking with 3.x when upgrading
>> to 4.y is a non issue?
>
> «Because my boss says so», «because my software is only supported for
> Samba 3», «because we have a recertifying process that takes too long».
>
> Believe me, a major version change is an issue that should not be
> underestimated just because it *should* work (and I'm not an advocate of
> just staying on old unmaintained versions, but staying on old,
> *supported* version does makes sense).

This is a recurrent argument. If it had prevailed we still provide
packages for Solaris 8. Fortunately it had not. A sticky argument also:
look how difficult is to stop providing packages for Solaris 9 which is
not maintained by its supplier. Lets the enterprises re-certify their
platforms as they still have more resources than we have. 

Note that Solaris 10 U11 provides Samba 3.6.8

As a reminder, our goal is to provide an up to date, i.e. state of the
art, package set for Solaris 10 and greater. Samba 4.0.9 corresponds to
this definition.
-- 
Peter
_______________________________________________
maintainers mailing list
maintainers@lists.opencsw.org
https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers
.:: This mailing list's archive is public. ::.

Reply via email to