thank you for your message and for your help regarding the pdb_sql module.
As you have noticed, I have set up a SourceForge project called pdbsql,
where developers interested in the pdb_sql module can join in.
My primary goal is to have a pdb_sql module available for all future
versions of Samba 3.x. Currently, I do NOT plan having a module
available for Samba 4. Samba 4 will be a transition, and I think
switching to LDAP at least then would be a good idea. However, I'll - of
course - leave the final decision up to the module maintainers.
The SF.net site as of today is a little bit empty, but I hope to get it
filled very soon. I have set-up a mailing list
pdbsql-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxx, which I'm CC'ing to this message. The list
should act as a coordination possibility between the pdb_sql
maintainers. I have invited all known interested parties (from Bugzilla)
to this list, so it's easy to reach everyone.
I have NOT send out list invitations to Samba developers, as you told
you have no ressources to contribute there, and I thought it would be a
good idea to save space on your inbox. :-) However, if you would like to
look at the development or even support us, I'd be glad to see you
We will continue to do 3.0.x releases. For example, 3.0.22
will be the next upgrade release. 3.0.21c will be a patch
release for 3.0.21. Any security releases for 3.0.x will
eat a minor number. So if there were a security release
for 3.0.21[a-z], that would take the place of 3.0.22 and
the code which was to become 3.0.22 would be pushed to 3.0.23.
In 3.0.21b, the pdb_sql module is still contained. If you release
3.0.22, it will be removed. What happens should there be a 3.0.21c? It
would then still be included, right? What happens should you release
3.0.23 and 3.0.24 and then a security issue pops up that affects all
Samba versions down to, let's say, 3.0.11. Then there would be no
security release for a pdb_sql-capable version, is this correct?
I'm just asking to know on how to coordinate and calculate.
(a) create a mailing list to replace the samba-pdbsql mail
alias on samba.org (so you can manage list membership easier).
I will then point the alias at your ml.
Can you (off-list) send me the recipients list for samba-pdbsql? Then I
can merge it with pdbsql-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxx and then the latter one can
act as a primary distribution point for contacting the pdb_sql developers.
Is it possible to have samba-pdbsql changed to pdbsql-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxx
in Bugzilla? If so, how? Then we could release the samba-pdbsql alias.
Otherwise, please point samba-pdbsql to pdbsql-devel and let me know
which address(es) I should add as allowed poster, so Bugzilla and Samba
mails get through.
(b) Get a build working again 3.0.21 (outside the samba tree)
to fix any existing bugs.
Right now, I have the diff for the modules available from the svn
command Volker Lendecke posted.
First, I would like to clean out the xml parts, as we (at least
currently) do not work on the XML module anymore. That should be fairly
easy, I think.
How do things then go on? Will there be a 3.0.21 release available w/o
pdb_sql support so we can check whether the patch can be applied? Or
shall we wait until 3.0.22 and then try to 1. get it applied 2. fix bugs
related to passdb backend changes?
I'm fairly new on software development, so if you could shed a light,
that would be much appreciated!
(c) Start focusing on making sure that you have a version
that builds against 3.0.22 and passes any regression tests
What would you prefer as a way of coordinating things? I thought of
having main development occur on sf.net and having pdbsql-devel as the
main list for development. From time to time, I would report news to
samba-technical, and hope that you let us know things that could affect
the pdbsql backend, so we can have a "gateway" between the Samba core
team and us through this. I urged all pdbsqsl developers to subscribe to
samba-technical as well.
Regarding Bugzilla: Shall we use the one on samba.org, or shall we move
After the first two things are completed, you might want to
announce the project on the samba ml. We could also run
a news item on news.samba.org once you have a successful
Thanks, that sounds like a good deal! I really hope we can keep the
module in production.
Looking forward on working with you, and again, thanks for all of your
support, this is much appreciated!