Scott,

With the occasional small exception, you can run earlier versions of 
applications on later versions of the server without
a problem.  The system is designed for backward compatibility and with the 
expectation that customers will regularly
upgrade the AR System server and midtier and like system components but may 
only periodically upgrade any application
we supply.

And further, the AR System is a development environment that many customers 
have built custom applications on.  We
have to be able to upgrade the AR System without impacting those applications.  
And, again, with the exception of an
occasional small issue (OK, someone missed something and a bug crept in), this 
works.

There have been one or two times where there was an issue large enough where 
there was a known incompatibility that
we announced and described how to resolve that we just had to make a change to 
the system that produced an
incompatibility.  An example of that was when we found that the On Loaded 
firing condition was firing at the wrong time
so that data was not being properly cleared on the screen by the Display 
operation.  Now the applications actually had
written some logic that was inadvertently using this bug and when it was fixed, 
the firing condition of maybe a dozen
active links throughout the apps needed to be changed form On Loaded to On 
Display.  The operation was the same, just
the wrong condition was being used and the bug allowed the wrong condition to 
work.  Our choice when this was found
was to leave the logic permanently broken in this area or to fix it.  Fixing it 
solved 10x the problems that customers were
having than the fix caused and it make the behavior correct.  So, we decided to 
fix it and call out the change.

Even with this type of issue, no problem running the older version of ITSM on a 
newer version of AR System -- just a few
active links needed a minor change to account for the behavior change due to 
the bug fix. 

But, this type of change is unusual and has happened maybe twice in 20 years.  
And the correction was provided and was
easy to put in place in both cases.

You should have no issue running the ITSM 7.1 version on a 7.6 AR System 
server. (other than the fact that the one issue
I called out above was either in 7.1 or 7.5 that we had the bug fix that did 
affect a few pieces of active link workflow -- if it
was 7.1 you are clear, if it was 7.5, you have a small number of active links 
to change a firing condition on).  And, I am
remote and don't have access to the release notes to confirm which release this 
topic came with.


So a Yes, it will work with a point qualification about one possible issue you 
need to consider.

Doug Mueller

-----Original Message-----
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Scott Hallenger
Sent: Wednesday, November 26, 2014 5:35 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: ITSM 7 Defs Running on ARS 7.6

Well in my scenario, the client would pay for the new ARS 7.6 licesnse, but 
would maintain their existing ITSM 7.1. I am still not clear on if 7.1 ITSM 
would run on ARS 7.6. From a def stainpoint it seem completely possible. Just 
looking for someone to chime in here who has done this or similar. BTW does a 
new install still come wit the 3 demo licenses... ? That could be useful for 
testing.

--------------------------------------------
On Tue, 11/25/14, LJ LongWing <[email protected]> wrote:

 Subject: Re: ITSM 7 Defs Running on ARS 7.6
 To: [email protected]
 Date: Tuesday, November 25, 2014, 5:59 PM
 
 **
 I would say yes...they are entitled to it and  received it during their 
support window....
 On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at
 3:54 PM, Jason Miller <[email protected]>
 wrote:
 **
 You and LJ are likely correct.  I have heard  similar things.  It is just odd 
to me and seems against how  a typical license agreement is written.  I am so 
use to  "you can use this as long as you pay us" (for  server software, not 
Office, etc.)  I just figured BMC  wasn't enforcing it or going after the 
organization it  knew about.
 So in the
 scenario above, what if the organization downloaded 7.6 or  even 8.x before 
they dropped support.  They can upgrade  since they downloaded it during their 
entitled period?
 
 Jason
 On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at
 2:30 PM, Rick Westbrock <[email protected]>
 wrote:
 **
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 I would check on ARS/ITSM
 compatibilities, I have heard of a customer who was on ARS
 7.1 and ITSM 7.0.03 and could not upgrade ARS to 7.5 because  their current
  version of ITSM would not work with that version of ARS. I  heard about this 
years after the fact so I don’t know if  any testing was done or if they were 
just going on what BMC  reported to them.
  
  
 As far as support my understanding
 (whether it’s correct or not is up for debate) is that you  should be able to 
run forever without a support contract but  you
  lose all abilities to initiate a case with BMC Support, no  access to patches 
or any other software and so forth.  I  haven’t read the fine print of a 
contract though so I  could be wrong. I was at a customer once who ran without  
support for nearly a year without
  a support contract because they were planning to migrate  from Remedy to a 
different platform. As I recall BMC  didn’t have a problem with the system 
running without a  support contract, they just wouldn’t sell additional  
licenses without renewal of the overall
  support contract. 
  
 If you were to buy software and a
 specific number of licenses wouldn’t you expect to be able  to run that 
software with that user count in perpetuity  regardless
  of whether you had a support contract? I think in Scott’s  case the customer 
needs to upgrade ARS for compliance  reasons so they are going to have to 
accept the costs  associated with that (i.e. purchase a support contract) or  
migrate to another platform (IMHO).
  
  
 -Rick
  
 From: Action Request System discussion
 list(ARSList) [mailto:[email protected]]  On Behalf Of Jason Miller
 
 Sent: Tuesday, November 25, 2014 2:12 PM
 
 To: [email protected]
 
 Subject: Re: ITSM 7 Defs Running on ARS
 7.6
  
 ** 
 
 Thanks for the info.  Viable,
 yes.  Potentially with some challenges.
 
  
 
 
 We are still on Help Desk 6 on 8.1
 ARS.  I stop short of calling it ITSM because all we are  using is Help Desk 
and this was before Assignment Engine,  EIE/AIE and various other newer 
processes external to AR  that
  now make up the whole ITSM suite tick.
 
  
 
 
 At this point I call it ours
 because it is so customized and so far out of support that  we'll never 
upgrade over it.  In fact we recently  converted all of the Help Desk, CMDB and 
SLA objects to  Custom (I plan on
  deleting the CMDB and SLA stuff, we don't use them and  are already broken 
binary-wise).
 
 
  
 
 
 With that said we still pay for
 support (granted we were heading down the ITSM 8.x path  until recently).  
Servers get old and need to be replaced,  that old version of ARS will will 
only go so far with newer  OSes.
  We will need new license keys for the new servers (without  playing illegal 
games).  We do a ton of development and we  want to continue to incorporate new 
(UI) features.  Starting at 7.5 the new and updated web UI controls have  been 
highly valuable.  We too
  use Remedy every day and it is considered one of higher  priority apps DR 
wise (much of the info we need to recover  is stored in Remedy).
 
 
  
 
 
 My aim is not to call out your
 customer however we are dancing around some legalities... 
 How can an organization upgrade ARS without a support
 contract?  The reasons your customer is not able to access
 parts of
  the BMC site, including software, is because that
 entitlement ran out with support.  I have heard stories of
 long-running systems that have been off of support for years
 so I know they are out there but I don't think legally
 an organization can continue to
  run Remedy without support?.?.?  I haven't read the
 license agreement that closely and am not qualified to be
 authoritative on the subject but it is my
 understanding.
 
 
 
  
 
 
 Jason
 
 
 
  
 
 On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 1:10 PM,
 Scott Hallenger <[email protected]>
 wrote:
 Long story here.... but they use
 remedy every day, yet they dont want to upgrade itsm....
 they are happy enough with their itsm as it is. However,
 they are running in to compliance issues outsode of remedy,
 like
  with MS..... Again long story, but I'm just checking if
 this could be a viable plan B. So I really need some
 ipinions to ring in here.
 
 
 
 
 
 --------------------------------------------
 
 On Tue, 11/25/14, Jason Miller <[email protected]>
 wrote:
 
 
 
  Subject: Re: ITSM 7 Defs Running on ARS 7.6
 
  To: [email protected]
 
  Date: Tuesday, November 25, 2014, 3:17 PM
 
 
 
  **
 
 
 
  You bet it is ok.  You have my blessing.
 
   <smarta$$ off>  I have not specifically run
 ITSM
 
  7.1 on ARS 7.6 but largely you should be ok.  There
 are
 
  some behaviors that may have changed between ARS 7.1 and
 7.6
 
  and might give you a few minor surprises but for the
 most
 
  part the def won't care.  I think if anything you
 might
 
  run into more issues with 7.1 binaries and a 7.6
 server. 
 
  Assignment Engine and Approval Engine might be
 interesting
 
  since those are now AR components but were ITSM
 components
 
  in earlier versions.  You might choose to no upgrade
 those
 
  as part of the AR upgrade to keep them inline with
 version
 
  that the ITSM def were designed around.
 
  From your previous post it sounds
 
  like you (or your customer) don't mind if it is an
 
  unsupported configuration and are working more to keep
 the
 
  lights on.  Really the only way to know will be to stand
 up
 
  a sandbox and test thoroughly.  Although if you no
 longer
 
  have support getting licenses for that sandbox could be
 
  prohibitive.   Your customer might need to check what
 they
 
  want to do (or not do) with reality.  How important is
 
  Remedy to them?  Not important enough to pay for
 support
 
  but important enough to try and keep it
 
  updated?
 
  Jason 
 
  On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at
 
  9:50 AM, Scott Hallenger <[email protected]>
 
  wrote:
 
  Seem
 
  completely feasable to me, but wanted to consult the
 minds
 
  on this as well. Is it OK to run a full ITSM 7.1 def set
 on
 
  ARS 7.6.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
_______________________________________________________________________________
 
 
 
  UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at 
 www.arslist.org
 
 
 
  "Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20
 
  years"
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  _ARSlist: "Where the
 Answers Are" and have been
 
  for 20 years_
 
 
 
 
 _______________________________________________________________________________
 
 UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at 
 www.arslist.org
 
 "Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20
 years"
 
 
 
  
 
 _ARSlist: "Where the Answers
 Are" and have been for 20 years_
 
 
 
 
 _ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" and have been
 for 20 years_
 
 
 _ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" and have been
 for 20 years_
 
 
 _ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" and have been
 for 20 years_

_______________________________________________________________________________
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
"Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"

_______________________________________________________________________________
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
"Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"

Reply via email to