Susan,
I know the timescales are completely and utterly unrealistic, but that seems to happen to a lot of the projects in our place, regardless of the scale (and we've had some VERY big system upgrades).
I've been telling everyone that our apps would run fine on v6, but its just been ignored. The way I see it is that my management has apparently been committed to upgrading the whole thing. I've even suggested that we start rolling out the
6.3 client, as all of our testing of that against the 5.1.1 server/apps has shown it to easily be as stable as the 5.1.1 clients, but even that has been ignored.
The only thing that will make the migration a little easier is that I've at least been tinkering with the apps for probably around six months, but up to now, haven't been able to dedicate anything more than a few minutes here or there to actually actively working on the migration.
There is an interesting reason behind the timescale though.
As it stands, I'm practically the only person in the company who can realistically manage the migration, but I'm being moved to another department, and the apparent schedule for that change is .... the 15th May.
Its frustrating, and considering the size of our company (we're BIG), doubly frustrating.
Regards
Dave
ps. I've quietly suggested that we wait just a little longer, as v7 is just around the corner. Just as with everything else so far, its ... been ignored.
On 03/05/06, Susan Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
**Dave,How important is it to go to ITSM 6 at this point since it doesn't sound like there is any agreed upon spec for it? And it's not realistic to think agreement and necessary changes would happen in 1.5 weeks especially if you have more than a couple of customizations. Agreement is what takes the longest !!Your v4 app will likely run fine on the ARS 6.3. That gets you on the new server and gives you time to get a commitment to the upgrade and all the changes required for the ITSM portion. Why not test it and offer that to your manager as an option?By then you may be ready to upgrade to ARS 7 and do ITSM 7 !an option,Susan
On 5/3/06, Dave Barber <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote:**David,First off - I don't think we're going over to full blown CM ... not yet, at least. Thankfully no license issues then.Thankfully, all the changes that I have made to the apps have been fully documented. Catch is that a lot of stuff prior to my being on the system either hasn't been adequately documented, or the documentation just isn't there.We can't just go to the vanilla app either, as we'd loose quite a lot of data if we did that - differences in field lengths and drop downs, fields that have been added, changed (and repurposed, not my doing, honestly, but I'll try and see if I can omit those).Regardless of the issues, it will be interesting week and-a-bit. I've already had a little laugh - was looking at the auto-reassignment process, and asked my manager about both that and if he'd had a look at the management console. He said "disable the auto reassignment, we'll look at that later", and "Management console?". Its better to laugh than cry.I really was figuring a month+ to get at least the basics in place. I'm glad you mentioned incremental functionality changes, as its something that I have suggested before, but its been pretty much ignored. My original suggestion (which was quite a while back) was to get our test server running ARS 6.3, and trial our current apps on there. If it worked fine, then we should have migrated our live server to the new hardware, running ARS 6.3 and the current apps (so our performance issues were cleared). That would have also got our user base onto the correct client. Following that, the test server should have been wiped and had a fresh install of ITSM 6 .... queue the testing, modification, reviews, etc.RegardsDave
On 03/05/06, David Sanders < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:**Hi DaveI'm sure that others who have gone through similar processes will be able to offer more advice, but my thoughts on your dilemma are as follows:With a go live date of 15th May, your only option is to go with vanilla out-of-the-box functionality. It's probably going to take you that long to set up the new server, plan what data needs to be migrated (config, asset/cmdb, live tickets and history) and get that done, and do some simple testing. Also, if you have any external integrations for data sources, such as people data, those obviously need to be in place. By itself, just doing that lot is probably optimistic for less than 2 weeks. Also, don't forget the licensing implications of going from change lite to full CM.Doing a gap analysis between your current processes/functionality and what is in the OOTB applications is a task that is going to need a thorough understanding of both applications, and many sessions with process owners to identify the changes, see where new functionality replaces that in the existing apps, and plan what changes are really needed in the new app. My guess is that this sort of process is going to take at least a couple of weeks (with proper buy-in and time from the process owners), and having identified the changes needed, another period of time after that to develop, test and migrate the new changes..... and then there's user training. And don't forget proper documentation of your changes this time too ! Ball park, I'd guess you'd need a couple of months, depending on the level of changes needed.I think you need to make sure that people know that what is being asked really isn't possible; either they need to change the go-live date and then plan a proper migration strategy with enough resources, or accept the vanilla app, prioritize the changes needed, and plan incremental functionality changes after the go live date. The most important issue is to get them to accept the problem now rather than waiting until a couple of days before they expect to go live.Looks like you're going to have an 'intersting' couple of months ahead. Hope this helps someDavid SandersRemedy Solution ArchitectEnterprise Service Suite @ Work==========================ARS List Award Winner 2005Best 3rd party Remedy Applicationtel +44 1494 468980mobile +44 7710 377761email [EMAIL PROTECTED]-----Original Message-----**
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG]On Behalf Of Dave Barber
Sent: 03 May 2006 11:12
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Migration from Helpdesk 4 to 6 ... timescalesAll,Just a little history first.We've been running helpdesk 4/ARS 5.1.1 for quite a few years. We had our test server upgraded to ARS 6.3, ITSM 6 towards the back end of last year, but work pretty much stopped as performance was seriously bad.After a lot of badgering of management, we finally got two new servers in place - one is in place and running with our test apps (ARS 6.3, ITSM6), the other is just sitting idle .... (which is a continual wind up, as our live server is having serious problems with its workload, I'm sure that the app and data migration onto that would be a pretty minor process).Anyways, to cut a long story short, the planning/testing/etc for the migration just hasn't been happening due to timescales and staffing issues (sickness, holidays, and people just not seeming to be interested). My manager has finally decided to allow me to allocate a lot more of my working day to getting the migration planned, tested and doneWhat has really gotten me interested/concerned is the timescales. In effect I'm having to start from scratch, as none of my colleagues have really documented what they've gone through, and I've been told that I have to get it all ready for 15th May. Scoping the whole application, getting necesary changes made, test data migrations, and the one I dont like - our change management is totally different to the standard packaged application (its based on the v4 lite change application, but with a lot of changes)I really, really don't think that a week and a half is sufficient to get this migration completed, especially with the decision making processes - any changes that I want to make to the standard application will obviously have to be agreed upon, not just by my manager and my immediate team, but by key users of the applications (who I'm sure will want other changes as well).Anyone else think that I'm going to have a difficult time with this?RegardsDave__20060125_______________________This posting was submitted with HTML in it_____20060125_______________________This posting was submitted with HTML in it___
__20060125_______________________This posting was submitted with HTML in it___
__20060125_______________________This posting was submitted with HTML in it___
__20060125_______________________This posting was submitted with HTML in it___
