Matt,
Yes. However, when do you think the new owner needs to take full
ownership of the current state?
BMC decided to take two products and "merge" them. Then _they_ (not
the previous author) released it to customers.
IMO: When you sell it, you are responsible for it no matter the
original source. It is the vendors responsibility to make it as good
(or bad) as they choose.
Now with that said...
ccrashh,
I feel your pain.
Yes there are pros and cons to any naming convention. However I have
not yet seen one that has zero cons. So no matter what is selected,
well, someone will be unhappy.
Any and all naming conventions suck. Well unless you happen to be part
of the comity that compromises until you all grudgingly agree to a
list that no one really wants, but everyone stopped complaining about.
Those people likely think that the final result is the "Lesser of all
evils". (Or they are forced to conclude that they wasted their time
producing something that is not worth using.)
To be totally clear, my above opinion does not excuse the vendor for
any of the following:
* releasing a product that is inconsistent with itself
* a product that appears to be very dependent on "String sorting" to
understand the relationships between its component parts
* a product design that some think borders on "developer hostile"
("But you can buy this or that add on tool to help with this or that.")
My opinion is just to point out that age old sayings still apply:
"You can not keep all of the people happy all of the time."
"You break it. You bought it."
"The customer is always right."
It is a tough job to try to deal with all three of those ideals at the
same time. And I think, in general, customers are becoming more
demanding too.
However, if we are looking to make suggestions for improvements......
( I have no idea if any of these already exist in v7.5. Maybe they
do. I can only hope. )
( While they do not apply only to ITSM, I think all of the following
would help sales/use of ITSM.)
The vendor could provide better ways to navigate from ARS object to
object for developers.
Things like:
Field Properties dialog, with a named menu... How about a button to
open the menu object?
Related workflow tab:
How about a table field with columns that I can sort on. Things
like separate fields for all of the following come to mind:
Execution order
Execute on button
Execute on field
Execution on Submit, modify, etc....
Number of If actions
list of types of If actions
Number of Else actions
list of types of Else actions
A way to add any object from any object list into a New or existing
Packing List. ( I think 7.5 has something like this... but maybe not
everywhere.)
Basically tools that help the developer to develop based on what is
obviously already in the system.
And there are a whole set of features/functions that I would love to
see added too. :)
--
Carey Matthew Black
BMC Remedy AR System Skilled Professional (RSP)
ARS = Action Request System(Remedy)
Love, then teach
Solution = People + Process + Tools
Fast, Accurate, Cheap.... Pick two.
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 9:15 AM, Matt Worsdell <m...@worsy.co.uk> wrote:
> Not BMC's fault, ITSM is based on ITSP which was produced by a VAR (name
> withheld to protect the guilty).
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
> [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of ccrashh
> Sent: 20 March 2009 12:53
> To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> Subject: ITSM naming convention sucks
>
> BMC has to be kidding with their ITSM suite's naming convention...for
> instance:
>
> On the HPD:HelpDesk form, the Customer Search button (inexplicably
> called Contact Search even though it is under the Customer Information
> section) has several Active Links associated to it (31 or so). If you
> were to go to the list of active links and sort by name, the first one
> that appears is:
>
> HPD:INC:ContactSearch_120_GPn-G
>
> However, the first one that triggers is:
>
> HPD:INC:ContactSearch_Info_035_GetPersonInfo
>
> Which is 19th in the list of 31 Active Links. WTF. Why would anyone
> do things this way? How can any real Remedy ARS developer work with
> this crap without wanting to put his/her fist through the monitor?
>
> Here's a tip...fix the naming convention!
>
> For example:
<snip>
> What BMC has provided is total crap...'natch.
>
> And my contract may require me to work on this...double sigh.
_______________________________________________________________________________
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
Platinum Sponsor: RMI Solutions ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"
