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 2329GMT + 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 8but 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 itand 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
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 2329GMT + 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 8but 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 itand then 'shortly' later released 7.6.4 which was the 'finished
Re: Next ARS version
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 2329GMT + 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
Re: Next ARS version
I disagree.. In many situations, version numbers are terribly important.. the biggest and best example I can think of is, restoration of portions of the DB when you have a SNAFU... I think with the nature of this product specifically (ARS) major version numbers should key around the DB control version, among other things.. A control version changes, a major version number also changes.. It helps a great deal when you are working various environments (as in the case of independent consultants), if you have a clear vision of these versions, as to why it was 8 and not 7.7 as in this most recent restricted release of 8.0... Joe From: Susan Palmer Sent: Monday, June 25, 2012 9:04 PM Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG 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 lj.longwing@mda.mil wrote: What I remember from that time is that 7.6.3 was supposed to be 8but 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 itand 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: 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 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/ ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug12 www.wwrug12.com ARSList: Where the Answers Are
Re: Next ARS version
I think you misunderstood my comment Joe. Of course you need to know what version you're on. Does it matter if it's version 8.0 or version 2012.x, not really. The confusion comes in when the 'dots' represent both minor and major. A change is a change, may be minor to some and major to others. I'm just suggesting is would be nice to group them by year and whether it's minor or major it just simply happened in that year. On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 8:34 AM, Joe Martin D'Souza jdso...@shyle.netwrote: ** I disagree.. In many situations, version numbers are terribly important.. the biggest and best example I can think of is, restoration of portions of the DB when you have a SNAFU... I think with the nature of this product specifically (ARS) major version numbers should key around the DB control version, among other things.. A control version changes, a major version number also changes.. It helps a great deal when you are working various environments (as in the case of independent consultants), if you have a clear vision of these versions, as to why it was 8 and not 7.7 as in this most recent restricted release of 8.0... Joe *From:* Susan Palmer suzanpal...@gmail.com *Sent:* Monday, June 25, 2012 9:04 PM *Newsgroups:* public.remedy.arsystem.general *To:* arslist@ARSLIST.ORG *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 lj.longwing@mda.mil wrote: What I remember from that time is that 7.6.3 was supposed to be 8but 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 itand 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: 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 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/ _attend WWRUG12 www.wwrug.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
Re: Next ARS version
An example of a Windows version that was a minor version update but is actually very different is Windows Server 2008 versus Windows Server 2008 R2 (not to be confused with Windows Server 2008 SP2.) In fact, I think that 2008 was technically Windows NT 6 and 2008 R2 is Windows NT 6.1, but I could be wrong. Thanks, Shawn Pierson Remedy Developer | Energy Transfer -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of pritch Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2012 7:25 AM 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 2329GMT + 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
Re: Next ARS version
In case of other products, version numbering is normally related to licensing. So when you buy a license, the upgrades inside a major version are included (that was the case of windows server 2008 and R2). But when you want to upgrade to another version, you must pay for the upgrade. In Remedy it doesn't make sense, since you are granted all upgrades if you are paying maintenance or none (even patches) if you are not paying maintenance. But I agree that version numbering is a bit confusing. According ITIL Release Management best practices, the version number must have a meaning. In Remedy it hasn't, so you must ignore it. But it would be helpful if it has this meaning. For instance: Major versions means a re-install to upgrade. Minor versions means an upgrade: functional change, but you can upgrade without installing everything again and migrating the data. Third number means a patch. Anyway, I thing that this topic is not enough important to create almost 20 emails :) Jose M. Huerta Project Manager** Movil: 661 665 088 Telf.: 971 75 03 24 Fax: 971 75 07 94 http://www.sm2baleares.es/ SM2 Baleares S.A. C/Rita Levi Edificio SM2 Parc Bit 07121 Palma de Mallorca http://es-es.facebook.com/pages/SM2-Baleares/158608627954 http://twitter.com/#!/SM2Baleares http://www.linkedin.com/company/sm2-baleares La información contenida en este mensaje de correo electrónico es confidencial. La misma, es enviada con la intención de que únicamente sea leída por la persona(s) a la(s) que va dirigida. El acceso a este mensaje por otras personas no está autorizado, por lo que en tal caso, le rogamos que nos lo comunique por la misma vía, se abstenga de realizar copias del mensaje o remitirlo o entregarlo a otra persona y proceda a borrarlo de inmediato. P Por favor, no imprima este mensaje ni sus documentos adjuntos si no es necesario. On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 4:13 PM, Pierson, Shawn shawn.pier...@sug.comwrote: An example of a Windows version that was a minor version update but is actually very different is Windows Server 2008 versus Windows Server 2008 R2 (not to be confused with Windows Server 2008 SP2.) In fact, I think that 2008 was technically Windows NT 6 and 2008 R2 is Windows NT 6.1, but I could be wrong. Thanks, Shawn Pierson Remedy Developer | Energy Transfer -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of pritch Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2012 7:25 AM 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
Re: Next ARS version
I heard that ARS 8.0.0.1 is going to be a complete rewrite from C to java. ;-P On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 7:13 AM, Pierson, Shawn shawn.pier...@sug.comwrote: An example of a Windows version that was a minor version update but is actually very different is Windows Server 2008 versus Windows Server 2008 R2 (not to be confused with Windows Server 2008 SP2.) In fact, I think that 2008 was technically Windows NT 6 and 2008 R2 is Windows NT 6.1, but I could be wrong. Thanks, Shawn Pierson Remedy Developer | Energy Transfer -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of pritch Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2012 7:25 AM 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 2329GMT + 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
Re: Next ARS version
:) HA HA HA Jose M. Huerta Project Manager** Movil: 661 665 088 Telf.: 971 75 03 24 Fax: 971 75 07 94 http://www.sm2baleares.es/ SM2 Baleares S.A. C/Rita Levi Edificio SM2 Parc Bit 07121 Palma de Mallorca http://es-es.facebook.com/pages/SM2-Baleares/158608627954 http://twitter.com/#!/SM2Baleares http://www.linkedin.com/company/sm2-baleares La información contenida en este mensaje de correo electrónico es confidencial. La misma, es enviada con la intención de que únicamente sea leída por la persona(s) a la(s) que va dirigida. El acceso a este mensaje por otras personas no está autorizado, por lo que en tal caso, le rogamos que nos lo comunique por la misma vía, se abstenga de realizar copias del mensaje o remitirlo o entregarlo a otra persona y proceda a borrarlo de inmediato. P Por favor, no imprima este mensaje ni sus documentos adjuntos si no es necesario. On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 5:10 PM, Jason Miller jason.mil...@gmail.comwrote: ** I heard that ARS 8.0.0.1 is going to be a complete rewrite from C to java. ;-P On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 7:13 AM, Pierson, Shawn shawn.pier...@sug.comwrote: An example of a Windows version that was a minor version update but is actually very different is Windows Server 2008 versus Windows Server 2008 R2 (not to be confused with Windows Server 2008 SP2.) In fact, I think that 2008 was technically Windows NT 6 and 2008 R2 is Windows NT 6.1, but I could be wrong. Thanks, Shawn Pierson Remedy Developer | Energy Transfer -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of pritch Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2012 7:25 AM 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 2329GMT + 1 + [ DST ] Email:mailto:Ben.Chernys_AT_softwaretoolhouse.com Ben.Chernys_AT_softwaretoolhouse.com Web: http://www.softwaretoolhouse.com
Re: Next ARS version
(this is a bit sarcastic, but that's my specialty) - What would make you think that a company that builds a system which is supposed to be based on ITIL best practices would use ITIL best practices in building that system? - Original Message - From: Jose Huerta jose.hue...@sm2baleares.es To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2012 10:59:41 AM Subject: Re: Next ARS version ** In case of other products, version numbering is normally related to licensing. So when you buy a license, the upgrades inside a major version are included (that was the case of windows server 2008 and R2). But when you want to upgrade to another version, you must pay for the upgrade. In Remedy it doesn't make sense, since you are granted all upgrades if you are paying maintenance or none (even patches) if you are not paying maintenance. But I agree that version numbering is a bit confusing. According ITIL Release Management best practices, the version number must have a meaning. In Remedy it hasn't, so you must ignore it. But it would be helpful if it has this meaning. For instance: Major versions means a re-install to upgrade. Minor versions means an upgrade: functional change, but you can upgrade without installing everything again and migrating the data. Third number means a patch. Anyway, I thing that this topic is not enough important to create almost 20 emails :) Jose M. Huerta Project Manager Movil: 661 665 088 Telf.: 971 75 03 24 Fax: 971 75 07 94 SM2 Baleares S.A. C/Rita Levi Edificio SM2 Parc Bit 07121 Palma de Mallorca La información contenida en este mensaje de correo electrónico es confidencial. La misma, es enviada con la intención de que únicamente sea leída por la persona(s) a la(s) que va dirigida. El acceso a este mensaje por otras personas no está autorizado, por lo que en tal caso, le rogamos que nos lo comunique por la misma vía, se abstenga de realizar copias del mensaje o remitirlo o entregarlo a otra persona y proceda a borrarlo de inmediato. P Por favor, no imprima este mensaje ni sus documentos adjuntos si no es necesario. On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 4:13 PM, Pierson, Shawn shawn.pier...@sug.com wrote: An example of a Windows version that was a minor version update but is actually very different is Windows Server 2008 versus Windows Server 2008 R2 (not to be confused with Windows Server 2008 SP2.) In fact, I think that 2008 was technically Windows NT 6 and 2008 R2 is Windows NT 6.1, but I could be wrong. Thanks, Shawn Pierson Remedy Developer | Energy Transfer -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG ] On Behalf Of pritch Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2012 7:25 AM 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
Re: Next ARS version
As mentioned later in this same thread, ITSM SP2 will run properly on AR System SP3 - but you have to move everything to SP2 and then move AR System to SP3 for it all to interact properly. That said, a future ITSM Suite 7.6.04 Service Pack is most likely in the works, yes. It may not be numbered as SP3, however since AR System has already released an SP3. -David J. Easter Manager of Product Management, AR System BSM Atrium Solutions Management 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:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of strauss Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2012 12:55 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Next ARS version ** You don't happen to know if there is an SP3 in the works for Atrium Core, ITSM, and RKM 7.6.04, do you? All of my apps are stuck at 7.6.04 SP1 since the ITSM SP2 installer was dead on arrival. My server and other ARS components have been on 7.6.04 SP3 for months now. Christopher Strauss, Ph.D. Call Tracking Administration Manager University of North Texas Computing IT Center http://itsm.unt.edu/ From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Easter, David Sent: Monday, June 25, 2012 9:08 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Next ARS version ** As with all forward looking statements, everything is tentative - including the version number. Tentatively, the next version is currently expected to be numbered as 8.0.00, yes. It is currently expected to be released in Q3CY12. It had been tentatively numbered as 7.7.00 until a few months ago. This emphasizes the reason why versions are not considered official or confirmed until General Availability is reached. Also note that whether it has Loads of new features or not is based on the perception of the individual making the statement. While numbered as 8.0.00, it would not be considered a major release based on content when compared to the industry's typical definition of major. Unfortunately, I can't go into details of content on a public forum to further explain. However, if you attend WWRUG 12, I'll be doing a What's New presentation there. And, of course, once it reaches GA there will be a What's New document that details new features. -David J. Easter Manager of Product Management, AR System BSM Atrium Solutions Management 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:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Ron Tavares Sent: Monday, June 25, 2012 3:53 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORGmailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Next ARS version ** Is there an ETA? .ron On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 12:16 AM, Joe Martin D'Souza jdso...@shyle.netmailto:jdso...@shyle.net wrote: ** It is technically Christened as 8.0 although it was formally scheduled to be released as 7.7. 7.7 release was renamed basically to 8.0. Joe From: Francois Seegersmailto:franco...@blueturtle.co.za Sent: Sunday, June 24, 2012 1:30 PM Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORGmailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Next ARS version ** Hi All, I really hope this version is a stable version that will win back customer trust in the remedy applications. Loads of new features and expectations will be respectable for a such major release but I think looking at the amount of bugs introduced since version 7.6 that stability across platforms is the most important. Francois From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORGmailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of praveen kumar Sent: Sunday, June 24, 2012 5:12 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORGmailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Next ARS version ** 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/ _attend WWRUG12 www.wwrug.comhttp://www.wwrug.com/ ARSlist: Where the Answers Are_ _attend WWRUG12 www.wwrug.comhttp://www.wwrug.com ARSlist: Where the Answers Are_ _attend WWRUG12
Re: Next ARS version
Keep in mind BMC is a leader - and sometimes you need to buck the trend to get exponential growth or improvement. Now leading to where or what that is the next question. -John Sent from my iPhone On Jun 27, 2012, at 11:58 AM, pritch pri...@ptd.net wrote: (this is a bit sarcastic, but that's my specialty) - What would make you think that a company that builds a system which is supposed to be based on ITIL best practices would use ITIL best practices in building that system? - Original Message - From: Jose Huerta jose.hue...@sm2baleares.es To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2012 10:59:41 AM Subject: Re: Next ARS version ** In case of other products, version numbering is normally related to licensing. So when you buy a license, the upgrades inside a major version are included (that was the case of windows server 2008 and R2). But when you want to upgrade to another version, you must pay for the upgrade. In Remedy it doesn't make sense, since you are granted all upgrades if you are paying maintenance or none (even patches) if you are not paying maintenance. But I agree that version numbering is a bit confusing. According ITIL Release Management best practices, the version number must have a meaning. In Remedy it hasn't, so you must ignore it. But it would be helpful if it has this meaning. For instance: Major versions means a re-install to upgrade. Minor versions means an upgrade: functional change, but you can upgrade without installing everything again and migrating the data. Third number means a patch. Anyway, I thing that this topic is not enough important to create almost 20 emails :) Jose M. Huerta Project Manager Movil: 661 665 088 Telf.: 971 75 03 24 Fax: 971 75 07 94 SM2 Baleares S.A. C/Rita Levi Edificio SM2 Parc Bit 07121 Palma de Mallorca La información contenida en este mensaje de correo electrónico es confidencial. La misma, es enviada con la intención de que únicamente sea leída por la persona(s) a la(s) que va dirigida. El acceso a este mensaje por otras personas no está autorizado, por lo que en tal caso, le rogamos que nos lo comunique por la misma vía, se abstenga de realizar copias del mensaje o remitirlo o entregarlo a otra persona y proceda a borrarlo de inmediato. P Por favor, no imprima este mensaje ni sus documentos adjuntos si no es necesario. On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 4:13 PM, Pierson, Shawn shawn.pier...@sug.com wrote: An example of a Windows version that was a minor version update but is actually very different is Windows Server 2008 versus Windows Server 2008 R2 (not to be confused with Windows Server 2008 SP2.) In fact, I think that 2008 was technically Windows NT 6 and 2008 R2 is Windows NT 6.1, but I could be wrong. Thanks, Shawn Pierson Remedy Developer | Energy Transfer -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG ] On Behalf Of pritch Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2012 7:25 AM 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
Next ARS version
Hello JSS is guilty of releasing major versions using the following revisions: 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, etc. And we denote minor revisions as follows, 3.5.14. I'd considered falling in line with BMC version numbers, but I concluded that (a) we supply the product for Kinetic, HP Service Manager, and more, and (b) release minor releases (sometimes with great new features) on an almost monthly basis. So if we'd settled on 7.6.04 last year, we'd be on 7.6.28 by now :) John ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug12 www.wwrug12.com ARSList: Where the Answers Are
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 lj.longwing@mda.mil wrote: What I remember from that time is that 7.6.3 was supposed to be 8but 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 itand 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: 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 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/ _attend WWRUG12 www.wwrug.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 _attend WWRUG12 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: Where the Answers Are_ _attend WWRUG12 www.wwrug.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 _attend WWRUG12 www.wwrug.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
Re: Next ARS version
You don't happen to know if there is an SP3 in the works for Atrium Core, ITSM, and RKM 7.6.04, do you? All of my apps are stuck at 7.6.04 SP1 since the ITSM SP2 installer was dead on arrival. My server and other ARS components have been on 7.6.04 SP3 for months now. Christopher Strauss, Ph.D. Call Tracking Administration Manager University of North Texas Computing IT Center http://itsm.unt.edu/ From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Easter, David Sent: Monday, June 25, 2012 9:08 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Next ARS version ** As with all forward looking statements, everything is tentative - including the version number. Tentatively, the next version is currently expected to be numbered as 8.0.00, yes. It is currently expected to be released in Q3CY12. It had been tentatively numbered as 7.7.00 until a few months ago. This emphasizes the reason why versions are not considered official or confirmed until General Availability is reached. Also note that whether it has Loads of new features or not is based on the perception of the individual making the statement. While numbered as 8.0.00, it would not be considered a major release based on content when compared to the industry's typical definition of major. Unfortunately, I can't go into details of content on a public forum to further explain. However, if you attend WWRUG 12, I'll be doing a What's New presentation there. And, of course, once it reaches GA there will be a What's New document that details new features. -David J. Easter Manager of Product Management, AR System BSM Atrium Solutions Management 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:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Ron Tavares Sent: Monday, June 25, 2012 3:53 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORGmailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Next ARS version ** Is there an ETA? .ron On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 12:16 AM, Joe Martin D'Souza jdso...@shyle.netmailto:jdso...@shyle.net wrote: ** It is technically Christened as 8.0 although it was formally scheduled to be released as 7.7. 7.7 release was renamed basically to 8.0. Joe From: Francois Seegersmailto:franco...@blueturtle.co.za Sent: Sunday, June 24, 2012 1:30 PM Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORGmailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Next ARS version ** Hi All, I really hope this version is a stable version that will win back customer trust in the remedy applications. Loads of new features and expectations will be respectable for a such major release but I think looking at the amount of bugs introduced since version 7.6 that stability across platforms is the most important. Francois From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORGmailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of praveen kumar Sent: Sunday, June 24, 2012 5:12 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORGmailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Next ARS version ** 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/ _attend WWRUG12 www.wwrug.comhttp://www.wwrug.com/ ARSlist: Where the Answers Are_ _attend WWRUG12 www.wwrug.comhttp://www.wwrug.com ARSlist: Where the Answers Are_ _attend WWRUG12 www.wwrug.comhttp://www.wwrug.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
Re: Next ARS version
I have never had the opportunity to experience an 'incidental' upgrade. Every one seems major. Although I've rarely upgraded as often as many of you do, just from a patch level to next patch level. I'd like to see the versions coordinated with the year so it's easily identifiable what year the version came out. Seems to me there were from pretty big differences between 7.1, 7.5, and 7.6. On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 2:35 PM, pritch pri...@ptd.net wrote: 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 lj.longwing@mda.mil wrote: What I remember from that time is that 7.6.3 was supposed to be 8but 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 itand 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: 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 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/ _attend WWRUG12 www.wwrug.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 _attend WWRUG12 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: Where the Answers Are_ _attend WWRUG12 www.wwrug.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 _attend WWRUG12 www.wwrug.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
Re: Next ARS version
Is there an ETA? .ron On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 12:16 AM, Joe Martin D'Souza jdso...@shyle.netwrote: ** It is technically Christened as 8.0 although it was formally scheduled to be released as 7.7. 7.7 release was renamed basically to 8.0. Joe *From:* Francois Seegers franco...@blueturtle.co.za *Sent:* Sunday, June 24, 2012 1:30 PM *Newsgroups:* public.remedy.arsystem.general *To:* arslist@ARSLIST.ORG *Subject:* Re: Next ARS version ** Hi All, I really hope this version is a *stable* version that will win back customer trust in the remedy applications. “*Loads of new features and expectations*” will be respectable for a such major release but I think looking at the amount of bugs introduced since version 7.6 that stability across platforms is the most important. Francois *From:* Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] *On Behalf Of *praveen kumar *Sent:* Sunday, June 24, 2012 5:12 PM *To:* arslist@ARSLIST.ORG *Subject:* Re: Next ARS version ** 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/ _attend WWRUG12 www.wwrug.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
Re: Next ARS version AD:WWRUG12
All the details of Version 8.0 will be featured in the WWRUG12 in October, And you still have a week before the current discounted registration fee ends. (you also still have a week left to submit a paper to present, And if it is accepted you get in free). Oct. 15-19 in San Jose California www.wwrug12.com Daniel From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of praveen kumar Sent: June 24, 2012 11:12 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: [SPAM]Re: Next ARS version ** 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/ _attend WWRUG12 www.wwrug.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 _attend WWRUG12 www.wwrug.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
Re: Next ARS version
As with all forward looking statements, everything is tentative - including the version number. Tentatively, the next version is currently expected to be numbered as 8.0.00, yes. It is currently expected to be released in Q3CY12. It had been tentatively numbered as 7.7.00 until a few months ago. This emphasizes the reason why versions are not considered official or confirmed until General Availability is reached. Also note that whether it has Loads of new features or not is based on the perception of the individual making the statement. While numbered as 8.0.00, it would not be considered a major release based on content when compared to the industry's typical definition of major. Unfortunately, I can't go into details of content on a public forum to further explain. However, if you attend WWRUG 12, I'll be doing a What's New presentation there. And, of course, once it reaches GA there will be a What's New document that details new features. -David J. Easter Manager of Product Management, AR System BSM Atrium Solutions Management 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:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Ron Tavares Sent: Monday, June 25, 2012 3:53 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Next ARS version ** Is there an ETA? .ron On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 12:16 AM, Joe Martin D'Souza jdso...@shyle.netmailto:jdso...@shyle.net wrote: ** It is technically Christened as 8.0 although it was formally scheduled to be released as 7.7. 7.7 release was renamed basically to 8.0. Joe From: Francois Seegersmailto:franco...@blueturtle.co.za Sent: Sunday, June 24, 2012 1:30 PM Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORGmailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Next ARS version ** Hi All, I really hope this version is a stable version that will win back customer trust in the remedy applications. Loads of new features and expectations will be respectable for a such major release but I think looking at the amount of bugs introduced since version 7.6 that stability across platforms is the most important. Francois From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORGmailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of praveen kumar Sent: Sunday, June 24, 2012 5:12 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORGmailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Next ARS version ** 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/ _attend WWRUG12 www.wwrug.comhttp://www.wwrug.com/ ARSlist: Where the Answers Are_ _attend WWRUG12 www.wwrug.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
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 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/ _attend WWRUG12 www.wwrug.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 _attend WWRUG12 www.wwrug.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
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 Sent: Monday, June 25, 2012 10:25 AM Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general To: 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 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/ _attend WWRUG12 www.wwrug.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 _attend WWRUG12 www.wwrug.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
Re: Next ARS version
What I remember from that time is that 7.6.3 was supposed to be 8but 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 itand 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: 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 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/ _attend WWRUG12 www.wwrug.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 _attend WWRUG12 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: Where the Answers Are_ _attend WWRUG12 www.wwrug.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
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 lj.longwing@mda.mil wrote: What I remember from that time is that 7.6.3 was supposed to be 8but 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 itand 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: 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 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/ _attend WWRUG12 www.wwrug.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 _attend WWRUG12 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: Where the Answers Are_ _attend WWRUG12 www.wwrug.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
Next ARS version
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/ ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug12 www.wwrug12.com ARSList: Where the Answers Are
Re: Next ARS version
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/ _attend WWRUG12 www.wwrug.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
Re: Next ARS version
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/ _attend WWRUG12 www.wwrug.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
Re: Next ARS version
Hi All, I really hope this version is a stable version that will win back customer trust in the remedy applications. Loads of new features and expectations will be respectable for a such major release but I think looking at the amount of bugs introduced since version 7.6 that stability across platforms is the most important. Francois From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of praveen kumar Sent: Sunday, June 24, 2012 5:12 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Next ARS version ** 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/ _attend WWRUG12 www.wwrug.comhttp://www.wwrug.com ARSlist: Where the Answers Are_ ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.orghttp://www.arslist.org attend wwrug12 www.wwrug12.comhttp://www.wwrug12.com ARSList: Where the Answers Are _attend WWRUG12 www.wwrug.comhttp://www.wwrug.com ARSlist: Where the Answers Are_ Blue Turtle Technologies (Pty) Limited | Reg. no.: 2003/002610/07 | http://www.blueturtle.co.za Gauteng : Tel: +27 (0)11 206 5600 | Fax: +27 (0)11 206 5606 | Midridge Office Estate, International Business Gateway, cnr New Road Sixth Street, Midrand, 1685 | P O Box 31331, Kyalami, 1684 Western Cape: Tel: +27 (0)87 721 1874 | Fax: +27 (0)21 552 7764 | Unit E6, Century Square, Heron Crescent, Century City, Cape Town, 7446 DISCLAIMER: This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and are intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. This communication represents the originator's personal views and opinions, which do not necessarily reflect those of Blue Turtle Technologies (Pty) Ltd. If you are not the original recipient or the person responsible for delivering the email to the intended recipient, be advised that you have received this email in error, and that any use, dissemination, forwarding, printing, or copying of this email is strictly prohibited. If you received this email in error, please immediately notify the sender. Thank you. ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug12 www.wwrug12.com ARSList: Where the Answers Are
Re: Next ARS version
It is technically Christened as 8.0 although it was formally scheduled to be released as 7.7. 7.7 release was renamed basically to 8.0. Joe From: Francois Seegers Sent: Sunday, June 24, 2012 1:30 PM Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Next ARS version ** Hi All, I really hope this version is a stable version that will win back customer trust in the remedy applications. “Loads of new features and expectations” will be respectable for a such major release but I think looking at the amount of bugs introduced since version 7.6 that stability across platforms is the most important. Francois From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of praveen kumar Sent: Sunday, June 24, 2012 5:12 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Next ARS version ** 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/ ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug12 www.wwrug12.com ARSList: Where the Answers Are
