Hi,
"Flemming Frandsen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Horst G Reiterer wrote:
> You cannot expect SAP to pay for a feature they are never going
> to use.
>
> It's not that I think this feature is a bad idea, but SAP DB is
> a gift and it is your duty to make it as good for SAP to have
> given you that gift as possible, pestering SAP to make changes
> that they will never see any value from is not a good way to go
>about it IMHO.
You're basically right. The situation here however is that the feature has
not been requested - it was there and has been removed. So any application
relying on this particular functionality will simply break with 7.4. If
there's no workaround, applications depending on it will either have to be
modified (if possible) or moved to a different database.
Missing features are one thing, removing previously existing functionality
without providing some way of replacement or workaround is a little
problematic though simply because every single application taking advantage
of SAP-specific functionality will break.
If - hyperthetically - specific functionality silently comes and goes in
future releases, developers and admins using SAP DB will have a hard time
keeping their systems and applications running.
I highly appreciate the gift - as you say - SAP provided, it is definitely a
very powerful piece of software. It's just that investing in it by building
applications atop SAP DB or moving customers to SAP DB is risky if key
functionality may vanish some day without any migration path. Just think of
a common class library for example - if only one class was removed all of a
sudden from one day to another without some form of alternative, every
single application relying on it would simply break - developers would be
_slightly_ upset.
> If you want a feature and SAP says that they have are not
> planning to put it in, then the best you can hope for is
> that they point you in the right direction to allow you
> to make the changes yourself
I have absolutely no problem with that, in fact I'm eager to do so.
Unfortunately - as you know - that is not necessarily a truly
straightforward thing to do because of the current language-mix and internal
naming conventions. Re-implementing the PERMLIMIT, to name a specific
feature, would require a broad understanding of most parts of the code.
We'll definitely try to implement functionality required by us ourselves but
what we certainly won't be able to do is "catching" dropped functionality by
re-implementing it independently so that developers and applications won't
be negatively affected.
The more non-SAP R/3 SAP DB installations will emerge in the future, the
more critical this issue will become...
cheers,
Horst G Reiterer
Chief Executive Officer
netarray, Austria
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________
sapdb.general mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://listserv.sap.com/mailman/listinfo/sapdb.general
