Hi FR-Team, I started configuring an FR Server and asked here which version I should choose. I got adviced to take 3.1.x and update to the upcoming 3.2 release. Now I read that this release will be skipped and next will be 4.0.x. Thats why I want to ask when the release will come up and how stable the 4.0.x branch is, is it stable enough to run it on a wide field? When will be the 4.0.x release? More precice I'm standing before the questions to wait for the next release while using 3.0.x or 4.0.x. It will be no complex infrastructure, just LDAP, PEAP w. MS-CHAPv2 and unsing the proxy. What's your advice? Thanks! --
On Sep 19, 2016, at 8:45 AM, Philipp Trenz <mail@philipptrenz.de> wrote:
I started configuring an FR Server and asked here which version I should choose. I got adviced to take 3.1.x and update to the upcoming 3.2 release. Now I read that this release will be skipped and next will be 4.0.x. Thats why I want to ask when the release will come up and how stable the 4.0.x branch is, is it stable enough to run it on a wide field?
It's stable, but it's under heavy development. If you want to test it, fine. But please don't put it into production. You will be running an unsupported version which *will change drastically* in the next few months.
When will be the 4.0.x release?
Hopefully this fall.
More precice I'm standing before the questions to wait for the next release while using 3.0.x or 4.0.x. It will be no complex infrastructure, just LDAP, PEAP w. MS-CHAPv2 and unsing the proxy.
Use version 3.0. It's the current officially supported release. Alan DeKok.
hi,
More precice I'm standing before the questions to wait for the next release while using 3.0.x or 4.0.x. It will be no complex infrastructure, just LDAP, PEAP w. MS-CHAPv2 and unsing the proxy.
a common question. if you want latest features, then 3.1.x will do the MSCHAPv2 stuff for you much better with winbind native and the LDAP stuff is much better too. *currently* there is little difference with 3.1.x and 4.0.x config BUT that is set to change massively. (I'd prefer the big changes just go to 4.1.x and 4.0.x becomes what it is now.....) (so whilst docs may say one thing, it may be best to wait for main developers to have a clear answer!) alan
On Sep 19, 2016, at 8:51 AM, Alan Buxey <A.L.M.Buxey@lboro.ac.uk> wrote:
*currently* there is little difference with 3.1.x and 4.0.x config BUT that is set to change massively. (I'd prefer the big changes just go to 4.1.x and 4.0.x becomes what it is now.....)
Major releases are for changes which break configurations. We don't do that in a minor release. We can't release version 3.2. OS vendors refuse to upgrade for years, and we just don't have enough people to to support 4-5 "stable" releases
(so whilst docs may say one thing, it may be best to wait for main developers to have a clear answer!)
Use 3.0. If you know what you're doing, and you *need* the functionality in 3.1, then use 3.1. Otherwise, wait for 4.0. Alan DeKok.
hi, so the key message is "Use 3.0, unless you know what you're doing, and you *need* the functionality in 3.1, then use 3.1. Otherwise, wait for 4.0" - so if people are aware of 3.1.x extra functionality, thats okay - but what about bugs/issues found in 3.1.x ? alan
On Sep 19, 2016, at 9:02 AM, Alan Buxey <A.L.M.Buxey@lboro.ac.uk> wrote:
so the key message is
"Use 3.0, unless you know what you're doing, and you *need* the functionality in 3.1, then use 3.1. Otherwise, wait for 4.0"
Yes.
- so if people are aware of 3.1.x extra functionality, thats okay - but what about bugs/issues found in 3.1.x ?
Submit a patch. We can commit to maintaining 3.0, and doing development on 4.0. Adding another release is just too much. So... anyone needing a fix in 3.1 should submit a fix. :( Alan DeKok.
participants (3)
-
Alan Buxey -
Alan DeKok -
Philipp Trenz