And do we really want to start a discussion about why an industry leader in the creation and selling of tools that enforce ITIL practices is unable to leverage those tools to follow those practices in it's own environment?
Rick On Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 3:44 PM, Guillaume Rheault <[email protected]>wrote: > ** > I vote for that. > I really don't care or mind if the patch number high. I also agree that > this is proper release mgmt. > Maybe a lister can take a look at the Service Transitioning ITIL guide to > see what is the best practice > > Guillaume > > > ------------------------------ > *From:* Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [ > [email protected]] on behalf of Rick Cook [[email protected]] > *Sent:* Friday, July 09, 2010 3:37 PM > > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: AR System 7.5.00 Patch 005 and 7.1.00 Patch 010 > > ** So we have two versions of 7.5 patch 5, and will soon probably have a > third. Having the ability to ascertain which of those I have installed > would be much more useful if we had some sort of lookup table available to > tell us which of the three we had installed, so that we would be able to > know whether it was the most current one. Our operational issues require > that we be able to identify what's on our systems. Something like the > SHARE:ApplicationProperties would be a natural place for that, but I would > hope that you could identify someplace that could be updated more quickly > and regularly. > > > A simpler solution would be to simply increment the patch numbers each time > one is released or fixed, and disable those known to be failures. > > Thoughts? > > Rick > _attend WWRUG10 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"_ > _______________________________________________________________________________ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug10 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"
