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. ::.
