|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Samba TNG redirect.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
|This page was nominated for deletion on 2 September 2008 (UTC). The result of the discussion was no consensus.|
|This page was proposed for deletion by an editor in the past.|
The "Software" came from "Samba software", where it was needed to differentiate from the language Samba. However Samba TNG isn't likely to be confused with anything, and isn't as cumbersome as its current page
- Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one sentence explanation, then sign your vote with ~~~~
- Add any additional comments
10oct2005:lkcl: hey, cool, samba tng gets a descriptive box. thanks, whoever you are!
16th October 2005: Removed negative comments about main Samba project. Made Samba TNG article more neutral. Jeremy.
12dec2005: thanks, jeremy. finding it difficult, but trying hard, to keep the objectivity required for wikipedia. can you think of a more accurate way to put what volker replaced? neither mine, nor his words, are entirely accurate. lkcl.
12dec2005: jeremy, i've re-added the comments about the proxying. if that had been added at the time, it would have been possible for myself - and for people like luke howard (XAD) and gordon ross (sun ms) - to run off of smbd from samba 3 and "outsource" the MSRPC traffic to external services, such as tng, and XAD, and Cascade (PC-netlink). because you (plural) refused to consider this as an option, i had no alternative. this is a simple fact, and there's no getting away from it (removing it from wikipedia doesn't make it go away). if you can think of a better way to express these simple facts, i'm happy to hear it. lkcl.
A number of statements in this article describe comparisons or disagreements with the Samba team, but no citations are given. Perhaps we could use some links to mailing list archives? I understand this is a touchy subject, and I thank the editors who have worked to eliminate much of the POV here. I hope that citations will make this article feel less angry and more focused on facts.--Ktdreyer 21:52, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
Grossly Negligent Project Mismanagement, and the consequences for free software users, world-wide
lkcl 21sep2006 hi ktdreyer - the samba tng project was a way to ensure that the work that i had done was at least not lost. i spent three years of my life gathering as much information as i could, as quickly as i could, and implementing it in what turned out to be a _useable_ proof-of-concept product - for very little in the way of thanks expressed or gratitude expressed - not even in email, let alone a concrete manner such as financial.
the thing is that the pace of that development was way beyond what the so-called leaders of the samba team could cope with - and - they simply got jealous, couldn't deal with the fact that i might know more than them, wouldn't listen to what i was saying - you name it, it happened. i am therefore a complete embarrassment to them, to the extent that the so-called samba team leaders had to apply fascist censorship rules last year, treating any postings made by me to samba mailing lists as 'net abuse' [i have not yet received an apology from them for this fascist treatment, nor have i received any official notification that the censorship has been lifted]
towards the end, i had to use OTHER PEOPLE to get my points across to them (other members of the team, usually). then, having successfully explained - behind their backs - the points to other people, these people would then go to the so-called samba team leaders, explain it to them, and then the so-called samba team leaders would come back to me and say 'see, this guy knows what he's talking about: i've been trying to tell you for months that this is the way it should be done'.
_after_ i left, the so-called samba team leaders had to figure out what i had done - and they chose to reimplement pretty much everything that i had done - and in the process, they learned that i was actually right: the ideas and concepts that i was trying to get across to them, that they had been fighting in some cases for over a year, were actually grounded in sensible reasoning - reasoning that they could not appreciate - or trust.
the thing is that that lack of trust and appreciation has set back the development of samba by several years (as evidenced by luke howard's ability to have produced an Active Directory Primary Domain Controller product pretty much on his _own_ - within only three years. he completed this commercial venture nearly three years ago).
the cost to businesses, as a result of the samba team's mismanagement (by them _not_ providing in a timely fashion a replacement for Active Directory server), must run into billions of dollars in microsoft license fees, alone - let alone the cost of businesses having to have idiot-windows-admins.
the samba project is a classic example of how free software development can be strangled by people who are too afraid to let more capable people lead the way, be it for technical or be it for strategic advancement.
the linux kernel is beginning to go the same way.
these are harsh lessons - and the samba team still not have learned them, and they still have not apologised for their quite blatant bullying. it has been six years and i am still waiting for an apology from them, despite hearing privately from people with whom some of the samba team members have talked - that they regret what happened, and that they realise why i was advocating what i was.
they have a lot to answer for.
First paragraph and how Samba and Samba TNG compare to WinNT
I'm having trouble understanding this sentence: "Samba TNG is therefore best paralleled with Windows NT 4.0 plus some bits, whereas Samba is best paralleled with Windows 2000 / 2003 minus some bits." I do not often use Microsoft software, so this seems odd. Honestly, I can't tell what's really different between NT4 and Vista besides some GUI changes. Comparing both projects to immediate successor and predecessor operating systems make it more vague; it sounds like the author of the sentence intended to make Samba TNG sound less capable? But with my understanding, it might just as well be claiming that Samba is like NT4 ("Windows 2000/2003 minus some bits") and Samba TNG is like 2000/2003 ("Windows NT 4.0 plus some bits"). Anyone care to elaborate? --Mike 07:19, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
Samba TNG is probably just about worth keeping as an article in its own right. However, it is definitely not worthy of this lengthly and involved article, which is currently too technical and unfocused. More suitable would be a couple of paragraphs giving a brief overview, and some containing further information for the interested. Straussian 15:28, 2 August 2007 (UTC)