[Pkg-samba-maint] r1450 - branches/samba4/debian

[Christian Perrier]

(Jerry, CC'ing you in case you miss that mail in the list, I think
that Samba's RM advice on the best strategy for handling the possible
coexistence of samba3 and samba4 in the same distribution, is mor
ethan interesting)

Quoting ctrlsoft-guest at alioth.debian.org (ctrlsoft-guest at alioth.debian.org):
> Author: ctrlsoft-guest
> Date: 2007-06-07 11:14:12 +0000 (Thu, 07 Jun 2007)
> New Revision: 1450
> 
> Modified:
>    branches/samba4/debian/changelog
> Log:
> Start preparing an upload of the new TP.
> 
> Modified: branches/samba4/debian/changelog
> ===================================================================
> --- branches/samba4/debian/changelog	2007-06-06 21:00:26 UTC (rev 1449)
> +++ branches/samba4/debian/changelog	2007-06-07 11:14:12 UTC (rev 1450)
> @@ -1,3 +1,9 @@
> +samba (4.0.0~~tp5-1) experimental; urgency=low


I'm *still* annoyed by the used of experimental for samba4 packages as
long as these packages are named "samba".

This, for instance, prevents us to upload beta releases in
experimental in an attempt to get more exposure when they're annoucned
upstream (uploading them to unstable would mean to take the risk of
such non-official releases to enter testing)..

Steve and I discussed this numerous times and I think we still do not
agree on the issue.

My personal impression from the samba development leads me to think
that we might have a moment where we will need to have *both* versions
of samba in the archive at the same time (probably conflicting with
each other).

At this moment, I don't think that having samba4 in lenny is something
realistic, so uploading samba4 to unstable is a no-no if one follows
the Release Team Mantra (Thou Shalt Not Upload To Unstable stuff that
is not suitable for the release).

*However*, it's pretty likely that samba4 will be a very good target
for lenny+1 while, in the same time, I don't see samba3 beng abandoned
for rock-solid and robust file and print services.

So, there *will* be a moment where we will need to have samba3 and
samba4 packages coexisting in unstable, both with the target of being
released.

As a consequence, I really think we should use versioned
packages....:)

Moreover, using them now will allow us to upload -beta and -rc
releases to experimental and then give more input to our respected
upstream when they prepare a release.


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-samba-maint/attachments/20070607/a40d4201/attachment.pgp