Well, I'll chime in with what we'll do. Whenever CF 8 is fully released, we will install that same day. :-) Alpha/Beta versions will be installed locally as we have access (and they work on Vista; for me at least).
On 10/5/06, Trey Rouse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 10/3/06, John C. Bland II <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > How soon, after release of CF 8, will you upgrade to CF 8? > > > > > > Note: This is for research, not just a curious question. > > > Honestly, it is too early to make such a judgement call. What I mean is > the > decision will be largely based upon the feature set enhancements > introduced. In such times that we're banging our heads against > limitations > of current release (jvm memory caps) and a new release would provide > immediate relief to those issues, we would look to be early / immediate > adopters. Any potential changes to cpu / license / virtualization model > would also provide a cost / benefit analisys and possible motivation to > migrate. > > However, if the new feature set adds further enhancements without > remedying > any of our current critical issues, we will likely wait till after the > first > roll-up update, if ever, to upgrade current infrastructure. Quite > possibly > we wont consider the cost of upgrading and the expensive testing around > that > until its time to replace the hardware underneath the version as well. > > In practice we have never 'upgraded' an existing server pool. We've > always > waited until it was time to allocate new hardware and brought new versions > online then. However we've often decided to continue to run old versions > at > that point as well. The decision is always based upon an audit of how > many > applications are still running on the pool we will be retiring, and what > would be the estimated cost in testing and recoding applications for > compatability. A decision is made at this point if absorbing that cost > and > effort is worth the feature set / benefits of the new version. Working in > a > cost - recovery model, if you don't have built in budget for these cycles > the path to upgrading is very difficult. > > We would like to think that applications come into a upgrade / feature > enhancement cycle frequently enough that we could address moving them to > newer version server pools at these times; however, in practice about 30% > of > applications deployed on a given pool never reach a upgrade / feature > enhancement phase and tend to run until the application is no longer > requireded. As such, it isn't practicle to assume you can phase out a > pool > without a testing / migration cost outside of normal development cycles. > > In short, I think if your research can wait until there is atleast a beta > feature list, I think your data might be more meaningful. Although I hope > that some description as to the decision process I've been involved in > might > be meaningful to you. > > $0.02 > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Introducing the Fusion Authority Quarterly Update. 80 pages of hard-hitting, up-to-date ColdFusion information by your peers, delivered to your door four times a year. http://www.fusionauthority.com/quarterly Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Talk/message.cfm/messageid:255691 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Talk/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
