Straight from the horse's mouth...literally.... Thank you Doug, that was
exactly what I was looking for.
On Wednesday, December 3, 2014 10:03 AM, "Tanner, Doug"
<[email protected]> wrote:
Thanks Doug M. as always a precise & thorough explanation :)
In addition to over a dozen customized business applications, we are running a
6.X version of Help Desk & Change Lite on our 7.6.4 (Prod) & 8.1.2 (DEV/QA)
servers with no issues.
Doug Tanner
-----Original Message-----
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Mueller, Doug
Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2014 4:09 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: ITSM 7 Defs Running on ARS 7.6
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"
This email is subject to certain disclaimers, which may be reviewed via the
following link. http://compass-usa.com/Pages/Disclaimer.aspx.
_______________________________________________________________________________
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"
