samba - Sep 2023 - Which sub version of Samba 4.19 will be considered for Debian bookworm-backports?

Hi folks,

I'm just curious about which subversion of Samba 4.19 that will trickle 
down to Debian bookworm-backports?

I have a hunch I saw a note from either Rowland or Louis van Belle quite 
a few years back on this list, that the .0 and .1, and possibly .2 
versions of Samba, are not considered stable enough for production. 
Please, correct me if I have got it wrong.

Otherwise it would be interesting to know, as I plan integration with 
Microsoft Azure later this year. What I understand, Microsoft has 
changed the requirements to at least AD forest level 2016 for that 
integration, while previously 2008R2 was sufficient.

Best regards,

Peter

On Tue, 5 Sep 2023 19:20:17 +0200
Peter Milesson via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote:
> Hi folks,
> 
> I'm just curious about which subversion of Samba 4.19 that will
> trickle down to Debian bookworm-backports?
> 
> I have a hunch I saw a note from either Rowland or Louis van Belle
> quite a few years back on this list, that the .0 and .1, and
> possibly .2 versions of Samba, are not considered stable enough for
> production. Please, correct me if I have got it wrong.
It was Louis that said that he didn't use '.0' & '.1'
minor Samba
versions in production and I said something like 'I don't use the .0
versions', but that was a long time ago and was after there had been a
couple of major releases that had had problems, these problems do not
seem to happen now and I am quite willing to use any supported Samba
versions, this includes '.0' & '.1' versions.
 
> 
> Otherwise it would be interesting to know, as I plan integration with 
> Microsoft Azure later this year. What I understand, Microsoft has 
> changed the requirements to at least AD forest level 2016 for that 
> integration, while previously 2008R2 was sufficient.
I have no idea if 4.19.x will go into Bookworm-backports and I also do
not think that Samba has any pull on this. The person who may know is
Michael Tokarev, the Debian Samba maintainer.

Rowland

05.09.2023 20:20, Peter Milesson via samba ?????:
> Hi folks,
> 
> I'm just curious about which subversion of Samba 4.19 that will trickle
down to Debian bookworm-backports?
> 
> I have a hunch I saw a note from either Rowland or Louis van Belle quite a
few years back on this list, that the .0 and .1, and possibly .2 versions
> of Samba, are not considered stable enough for production. Please, correct
me if I have got it wrong.
> 
> Otherwise it would be interesting to know, as I plan integration with
Microsoft Azure later this year. What I understand, Microsoft has changed the
> requirements to at least AD forest level 2016 for that integration, while
previously 2008R2 was sufficient.
?Patience you must have, my young Padawan. Have patience and all will be
revealed."

You're asking a wrong question by now.

As you might have noticed, I already uploaded 4.19.0 to unstable.  Unlike with
all previous
releases in debian which were uploaded to experimental first, due to a number of
reasons,
and were faced unstable at release .1 or up only.

I'm not saying 4.19 is more stable than experimental, but let's give it
a try in unstable
first and see how it goes.  Next we can decide if it's okay to have 4.19.0
in bookworm-
backports or it will be 4.19.10.

If you really want 4.19.0 on bookqworm or even bullseye *now* to try freshest
functionality,
you can grab binaries from my repository - it has 4.19.0 since yesterday.  Just
don't forget
to switch to bpo12 once version wanted by you is in there.

/mjt