Skip to main content
S
21-Topaz I
STEVEG21-Topaz I
21-Topaz I
January 8, 2014
Question

Maintenance release

  • January 8, 2014
  • 24 replies
  • 4550 views

I don't know if this has been brought up recently but has anyone noticed that since PDMLink 10.1 has been released a maintenance build has been released every 3 or 4 months...except for the next one (M050). M040 was released April 25, 2013 but M050 will be released Q3 2014. About a year and a half? They must finally be putting some work/thoughts into this next build.


Just a hump-day thought.


Steve G

24 replies

Show previous replies
J
jessh12-Amethyst
12-Amethyst
January 9, 2014
"Account for this"?

How?

If you have new versions of data (and possibly new types of data)
squirreled away into BLOBs in the database, etc, I'm not sure how you
reasonably find it all -- much less fix it.

Or if you have subtle new arrangements of relational data one didn't
have before, I'm not sure how you'd possibly find such conditions.

S
sdrzewiczewski10-Marble
10-Marble
January 9, 2014
Should these types of changes occur during a MOR?
J
jessh12-Amethyst
12-Amethyst
January 9, 2014
Sometimes they have to.

That said:

1. I concur with the desire for a rollback feature.
2. I believe work could potentially be done to identify whether a given
MOR could possibly have this issue (through various source code
change analyses, etc) -- double-check the necessity of the change
and denote this as part of the MOR.

Without a rollback feature, one could try what I'd consider "best
cluster deployment practice", which is to manage one's installation
directory with a source control system. [I consider this "best
practice" for clusters because one gets full reproducibility /and/
traceability of the installation.] In this case one could revert the
whole installation directory to the previous version. I'm not sure
whether this would run into issues or not if one attempts to use this
for an MOR rollback.

S
ScottPearson1-Visitor
1-Visitor
January 9, 2014
What's been interesting to note about the direction this thread has taken is that it drives home my original point of...., Installing the latest and greatest build of any software -- Windchilll, Creo, etc. -- requires a great deal of forethought, planning, implementation, and -- as always -- a Plan B in case an unanticipated problem creeps into the mix.

All that effort costs time and money...., and frequently it is not to "gain new functionality" but merely to "retain existing functionality" and "stay up-to-date".

And yet there was a criticism of why some folks choose not to install every build that comes along.

I'm a big fan of staying up to date for all the good reasons mentioned but when folks choose to stay put on a certain mix of versions of Creo + Windchill + you-name-it that is actually working for them, those users should not be criticized as if they were slackers. That criticism does not properly look at The Big Picture.

My two cents' worth...

Scott Pearson
Senior Designer
CAD System Administrator

[cid:image004.png@01CF0D16.CDDB59E0]S O U T H W E S T R E S E A R C H I N S T I T U T EĀ®
Space Science and Engineering Division
Space Systems Directorate
Department of Space Engineering
6220 Culebra Road, San Antonio, TX 78238
Terms & ConditionsCookie settingsAccessibility statement