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: [email protected] 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 <[email protected]> wrote: What I remember from that time is that 7.6.3 was supposed to be 8....but they realigned things to internal numbering practices...and was originally supposed to include overlays...but they couldn't get it hardened before GA...so they released 7.6.3 without it....and then 'shortly' later released 7.6.4 which was the 'finished product' that 7.6.3 was supposed to be... -----Original Message----- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Joe Martin D'Souza Sent: Monday, June 25, 2012 12:58 PM To: [email protected] 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:[email protected]> Sent: Monday, June 25, 2012 10:25 AM Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general To: [email protected] 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 <[email protected]> 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"
