On 8/2/07, Glen Wiley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Bart, > > You or Tim had mentioned the idea of being able to support "checkpoints" > of some kind which would let more rigid environments take advantage of some > of the more useful features with reduced risk. Do you see motion in that > direction? > > > This message posted from opensolaris.org > _______________________________________________ > opensolaris-discuss mailing list > opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org >
The problem as I see it with checkpoints, is what happens if a custom runs into a problem between the checkpoints? Bart wants to do away with "Dim Sum" patching. How does Sun support problems that a custom runs into in between checkpoints? IE: Do they go from a "testing" checkpoint to an intermediary SXCE-latest "unstable" checkpoint? Personally I would say that this is a valid support option. But it needs to be made clear to the customer. The biggest advantage of this is it would exercise the code earlier in the release cycle. Sun might even subsidize this support model with a relatively low support price, in exchange for customers testing newer code, and accepting lower SLAs and support guarantees. (IE: No patching, wait for next release with code fix, and upgrade to that release. Cheers, Brian
_______________________________________________ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
