> I would not hold my breath for the white paper 

It's not just a white paper to make BMC applications compatible with
CMDB 2.0x.  It will also require the applications to be patched.  While
I'm not involved in that area of development, the latest I've heard is
that it's still scheduled and has not been cancelled.  My guess would be
that something official would be announced in late April or early May.
 
Thanks,
 
-David J. Easter
Sr. Product Manager, Service Management Business Unit
BMC Software, Inc.
 
The opinions, statements, and/or suggested courses of action expressed
in this E-mail do not necessarily reflect those of BMC Software, Inc.
My voluntary participation in this forum is not intended to convey a
role as a spokesperson, liaison or public relations representative for
BMC Software, Inc.

________________________________

From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rick Cook
Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2007 9:21 AM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: CMDB 2.0 compatibility with ARS 6.x... (Corrected to Change
6.0)


** 
I think you're probably right, Shyam.  It probably wouldn't be delayed
this long unless there were some strategic concerns at play.  For my
$0.02, there are customers who have no intention of upgrading ITSM
beyond v6 for the time being, understand that there is no easy upgrade
path, and yet they would like the much improved CMDB CDM and enhanced
functionality it offers for as long as they are on ITSM 6.  If support
is such a major concern (and I am not at all saying it shouldn't be),
then perhaps the white paper needs to include caveats that "Support on
this is limited to.....".  Then let the customers decide if they have
the bandwidth and expertise available to fly pretty much solo on it, or
wait until they want to upgrade ITSM. 
 
Of course, experienced customers know that the first time or two through
a new process like this, they're pretty much finding the bugs that QA
did not anyway, and helping support to know how to navigate the
minefields, so maybe they should release this in a limited fashion to a
couple of high-profile companies that are willing to trade the extra
work in return for getting this done early.  Of course, by the time that
process is finished, it may be a completely moot point anyway, as ITSM 6
will be rolling toward the end of the supported products line. 
 
Rick
 
On 3/21/07, Shyam Attavar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: 

        Joe,
        
        I am also eagerly awaiting the white paper that will support
running ITSM
        6.x on CMDB 2.x. However, I have heard that there are concerns
about the 
        complexity from a support perspective and BMC is re-evaluating
this
        compatibility. Furthermore the upgrade path from such a
configuration to
        ITSM 7.x or higher.
        
        I would not hold my breath for the white paper 
        
        Cheers,
        --
        Shyam
        
        ----- Original Message -----
        From: "Joe DeSouza" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
        Newsgroups: gmane.comp.crm.arsystem.general
        To: <arslist@ARSLIST.ORG>
        Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2007 4:40 PM
        Subject: CMDB 2.0 compatibility with ARS 6.x... (Corrected to
Change 6.0)
        
        
        > Disregard my previous email... my question actually is is 6.0
Change
        > running on a 7.x ARS platform compatible with CMDB 2.0?
        >
        > I know this might not be supported if you go strictly
according to the
        > compatibility matrix but am wondering if this combination
could be made 
        > workable either directly or using some sort of a workaround..
Any good
        > reasons besides the compatibility matrix why it would not
work?
        >
        > Joe
        >
        

__20060125_______________________This posting was submitted with HTML in
it___ 

_______________________________________________________________________________
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org ARSlist:"Where the 
Answers Are"

Reply via email to