On 29/01/2010 16:49, Daniel Hain wrote: > Could we get a +1 to allow the project team to move ahead or do we need > to wait for the next meeting for the litany (or other objections)?
What I sent was equivalent, I don't actually have to type '+1'. > The project team is eager to move forward integrating this into Nevada > before the window of opportunity for S10U9 soak/backport closes. > > Thanks, > > Dan > > On 01/28/10 10:31 AM, Darren J Moffat wrote: >> Having discussed this offline with some people the following is my >> suggestion to move this forward. >> >> Samba can integrate with a private copy of the Mozilla 6 LDAP for >> Solaris 10 U9 onwards. >> >> Until such time as there as an active project team and a stated >> direction (hopefully an ARC inception review) for updating the the >> current libldap.so in OpenSolaris Samba can carry a private copy of >> the Mozilla 6 LDAP there as well. This is on the assumption that the >> Samba project team will work with any future LDAP project team for >> OpenSolaris to ensure that the needs of Samba are considered in >> changing the system libldap. >> >> While this is less than ideal given the desire to quickly get an >> updated Samba into Solaris 10 U9, where there is no in kernel CIFS >> server, I think this is the best that this project team can be >> expected to do. >> > > -- Darren J Moffat
