Why are you so concerned with the release number? And with BMC? There are many examples that I personally have worked on. One was an optical device driver system originally picked up from a UK company. I do not know that the product is still alive. Another product I worked on - a client server backup software crossing platforms etc had occasions when major enhancements were bundled in a small increment of release number. One such enhancement was a complete port of the code to a new OS.
IBM DOS (built by Microsoft) itself came up with 3.0 and then 3.1 which was a major enhancement over 3.0. Admittedly, the reverse is more often the case: where minor enhancements are bundled together and the release number seems to imply a major enhancement. Again, all I am saying is that release numbers are arbitrarily decided (generally by marketing!) and do not necessarily reflect the amount of changes taking place in the code or the efforts required for upgrades. Enough said on the subject. Cheers Ben -----Original Message----- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of pritch Sent: June-27-12 14:25 To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Next ARS version Thanks for the info. Can you give examples of non-BMC software that issues major updates with only bumping the minor (or release) version - ie Has MS Windows released a major update that went to 6.1 rather than 7. I know that's an OS vs an app system, but do any other apps that you know of do that (Crystal, SAP, etc)? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ben Chernys" <ben.cher...@softwaretoolhouse.com> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2012 4:51:20 AM Subject: Re: Next ARS version In any software, the version number is not decided on any logical or code based reason but rather a marketing or arbitrary reason. In the case of Remedy this is not different than say Meta-Update, Windows, etc. or any number of software products that I have worked on. ARS 5.12 was a minor version number change from 5.1 (+.02) but was a major release as new field types were introduced and some field structures were significantly changed. I am still waiting for one of those changes to be implemented in any Admin tool. That is an enum where the integers and labels are the results of queries. I have never tested that such a field is possible but the structures to define such a field have been in place since 5.12. I expect that the code was never implemented given the convolutions ITSM has to simulate such a thing. 7.6.04 was a major release as overlays were introduced. This is only on arserver(d). ITSM also had major changes. 6 to 7 was a minor arserver release mostly to support multi-tenancy but a major ITSM release with a completely different foundation data, help desk, etc, multi-tenancy. 5.0 was not significantly different that 4.x and I would have classified that as a small upgrade. I would have classified 5.12 as a major release. This is based on experience and not version numbers. I also remember a 7.0.1 patch that changed the database structure removing the ability to go back (without a backup). I am not sure that this was documented. Version numbers are always rather arbitrarily chosen. They would perhaps be better as names or labels so as to not build any expectations. On all software releases and upgrades, look at the release notes and not the version number to guess the nature of the release (ie whether minor or major). And it is a guess. Release notes are not always complete and also do not always reflect all the changes that have taken place. I am sure that does not give you or your customers much confidence or much ability to judge efforts required. As always, major or minor, upgrade in a test environment pretty close to your production environment with both the customisations and data quantities. As for ITSM, I would consider any release change including patches as major and requiring significant efforts. Just my 2 cents worth on the subject J Cheers Ben Ben Chernys Senior Software Architect Description: logoSthInc-sm Canada / Deutschland Mobile: +49 171 380 2329 GMT + 1 + [ DST ] Email: <mailto:Ben.Chernys_AT_softwaretoolhouse.com> Ben.Chernys_AT_softwaretoolhouse.com Web: <http://www.softwaretoolhouse.com/> www.softwaretoolhouse.com Check out Software Tool House's free Diary Editor and out Freebies Section for an ITSM 7.6.04 Forms and Fields spreadsheet. Meta-Update, our premium ARS Data tool, lets you automate your imports, migrations, in no time at all, without programming, without staging forms, without merge workflow. <http://www.softwaretoolhouse.com/> http://www.softwaretoolhouse.com/ -----Original Message----- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of pritch Sent: June-26-12 21:36 To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Next ARS version SLA's with clients are based on minor / major release levels - more time to upgrade to major releases from GA. When BMC changes it from 7.6.03 to 7.6.04 the client 9at least mine) wants to know why it's going to take so much effort to upgrade when the version number reflects only an 'incidental' release. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Susan Palmer" <suzanpal...@gmail.com> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Sent: Monday, June 25, 2012 9:04:16 PM Subject: Re: Next ARS version ** What does it really matter what the number is?? The content is what matters.? We'll be told when they want us to know.? That's been the mantra since I started using Remedy in 1995, don't bother asking ...we're not telling.? On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 2:01 PM, Longwing, LJ CTR MDA/IC < <mailto:lj.longwing....@mda.mil> lj.longwing....@mda.mil > wrote: What I remember from that time is that 7.6.3 was supposed to be 8....but they realigned things to internal numbering practices...and was originally supposed to include overlays...but they couldn't get it hardened before GA...so they released 7.6.3 without it....and then 'shortly' later released 7.6.4 which was the 'finished product' that 7.6.3 was supposed to be... -----Original Message----- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG ] On Behalf Of Joe Martin D'Souza Sent: Monday, June 25, 2012 12:58 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Next ARS version ** That?s weird.. did they call it a maintenance release? No way it wasn?t.. With the introduction of something so foreign to the ARS as the overlays, it can?t be considered a maintenance release.. It was a major release.. In my opinion, any release that changes the structure of the underlying database IS NOT a maintenance release. Changes to the DB structure, should be one of the several other criteria, that determines if a release ought to be qualified as a major release.. If they had already changed the structure of the DB in 7.6.03, and then leveraged that new structure in 7.6.04, then yes, it can be argued as a maintenance release, but I do not think this was the case. The DB structure was altered in 7.6.04 to accommodate the overlays feature, and not in 7.6.03.. Joe From: Tauf Chowdhury <mailto: taufc...@gmail.com > Sent: Monday, June 25, 2012 10:25 AM Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general To: <mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG> arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Next ARS version ** Personally, I think BMC needs to redefine its versioning criteria after seeing what happened with 7.6.03 to 7.6.04. I still can't make sense of how 04 was a "maintenance release." Sent from my iPhone On Jun 24, 2012, at 11:11 AM, praveen kumar < <mailto:prawin_ku...@hotmail.com> prawin_ku...@hotmail.com > wrote: ? ? ? ?** ? ? ? ?Yes..! next ARS release will be 8.0 confirmed by BMC. Loads of new features and expectations. Fingers crossed for the upcoming release. ? ? ? ?Cheers.! ? ? ? ?prawin ? ? ? ?> ? ? ? ?> I think it was to be 7.7, but then BMC decided there are enough new ? ? ? ?> feature to call it 8.0. ? ? ? ?> ? ? ? ?> On 24/06/2012 12:22, Jose Huerta wrote: ? ? ? ?> > ** I'm a bit confused about next version. ? ? ? ?> > ? ? ? ?> > Some people told me that it will be 7.7, but others say 8.0. I'm sure ? ? ? ?> > that you'll have the correct answer. ? ? ? ?> > ? ? ? ?> > Regards, ? ? ? ?> > ? ? ? ?> > Jose Huerta ? ? ? ?> > <http://theremedyforit.com/> http://theremedyforit.com/ ? ? ? ?> > _attend WWRUG12 <http://www.wwrug.com> www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"_ ? ? ? ?> ? ? ? ?> _______________________________________________________________________________ ? ? ? ?> UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at <http://www.arslist.org> www.arslist.org ? ? ? ?> attend wwrug12 <http://www.wwrug12.com> www.wwrug12.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are" ? ? ? ?_attend WWRUG12 <http://www.wwrug.com> www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"_ _attend WWRUG12 <http://www.wwrug.com> www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"_ _______________________________________________________________________________ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at <http://www.arslist.org> www.arslist.org attend wwrug12 <http://www.wwrug12.com> www.wwrug12.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are" _attend WWRUG12 <http://www.wwrug.com> www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"_ _______________________________________________________________________________ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at <http://www.arslist.org> www.arslist.org attend wwrug12 <http://www.wwrug12.com> www.wwrug12.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are" _______________________________________________________________________________ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug12 www.wwrug12.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are" _______________________________________________________________________________ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug12 www.wwrug12.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are" _______________________________________________________________________________ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug12 www.wwrug12.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are"
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
