Ascend Archive
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: (ASCEND) Patches?



On Wed, 8 Oct 1997, Kevin Smith wrote:

> At 05:51 PM 10/6/97 -0700, Randy E. Reinhardt wrote:
> >Mr. Smith,
> >I have had enough - it is time to make my voice heard and try and raise as
> >many other voices in protest as I can.
> >First, a little background:  
> 
> [snip]
> 
> >Now....the problem(s):
> >
> >1.    How hard is it to get either an i or p software Rev. that supports
> >56Kflex/Rockwell 1.x or later - and - ISDN without the HDLC going insane -
> >and - V.34/fc/fast - and - works with radius Auth/Acct?
> >
> >    A.  What was it, p16 that introduced Rockwell 1.x, but also introduced
> >        the ISDN HDLC insanity?
> >    B.  p23/24 introduced v.fc/fast support but also added Radius insanity?
> >    C.  p27 solves the Radius insanity, has v.34/fc/fast, has Rockwell code
> >        1.x but it has been 11 weeks since you added HDLC insanity - where 
> >        is the fix?
> >
> >I have also noted with increasing frequency you folks adding 'enhancements'
> >to the p series - look folks, that is for the i series, leave the p series
> >bloody well alone for features and concentrate on just fixing bugs.  And
> >while you fix one bug don't add three more in the process please.
> 
> As you probably know, you are not the only person who has
> commented on the problem with patch releases and new bugs. Taking into
> consideration all of the comments that we regularly get on this subject, we
> have made some radical changes to how we will be releasing software in the
> near future. What we are seeing today is the tail-end of the "old way". 
> 
> I hope that some of you have been around long enough to recognize that we
> already made major improvements in stability and performance at around
> the same time as we started releasing patch and incremental releases in
> separate branches. That was the first step in moving from the very dynamic
> small company method of software releases. We used to be able to turn around
> new features "on a dime", the cost to that was the limited time allocated
> to fixing bugs in existing code and reduced regression testing time. We
> largely fixed that with the two-branched release structure. One branch was
> dedicated to fixing bugs in the base-code, while the other was for bringing
> new features to market at an accelerated pace (customer requests). 

  Ascend has come a looooong way from when I first started working with
the Max's, I remember a new release would hit the FTP site daily, So I
can vouch for the progress that ascend has made , Hell, I remember
upgrading nightly. BUT, It has taken way to long to migrate in that
direction, If we following the archives of this users list we can see
complaints from day one to present day. 

> 
> Things are still not perfect, so we're moving ahead again. We will be making
> more changes to the way that new features are released, and concentrating
> more on bug fixes in existing base code - without the addition of new features
> or major 'enhancements'.

 Hey maybe a bounty for finding bugs :) I need some vacation money!

> 
> Watch out for an announcement within the next two weeks on our new
> software release strategy - I think you'll be pleased.

 It's been long awaited I'm sure we will


> >2.    I was happy to see you consolidating the p series docs to include all
> >the previous ones as well.  Now to continue that line....why is it certain
> >features, even with a new set of manuals, I have to go all the way back to
> >4.5 and 4.6 manuals to find what they do/how to use them?  There are certain
> >features that you may have to research 7 or 8 different manuals, online
> >and/or paperbased, just to find the answers.  Why can't you have one
> >baseline manual, an i series and then a p series that between them has ALL
> >the functions, features, syntax, etc.?
> 
> Hmm. I'll be sure to pass this onto the tech pubs manager. I'm sure he'll 
> want to discuss this further to understand what features are missing....as
> you can see we have been working on major improvements in the documentation
> and how it is presented.
> 
> >3.    Lastly, this HDLC problem blind-sided me, we can find out in the docs
> >what bugs/enhancements you have fixed, but where can we find out what issues
> >are still pending?  It would have been nice if there had been an online
> >resource where I could have gone to see what problems were still pending and
> >let me make the decision whether to upgrade or not with information in hand
> >instead of seeing, yeah, they fixed that bug, cool lets upgrade, then
> >finding out all my ISDN customers are going to be very unhappy with this
> >upgrade - after the fact?  If you know there is a problem, tell us about it
> >please.
> 
> Agreed. I have an action item to bring this subject up in our next few TR
> meetings so that *ANY* potential service-effecting problem that is still
> open in a new release should be considered as a possible "Known Problems"
> item in the release notes. NOTE - we *did* do this with the RADIUS Accounting
> problem.

 Yes, but I do believe this was the first time this was done, Or maybe it 
was SLIP. This should have been followed from day one, hell I can remember
when once radius accounting was left out. But once again, These are 
big steps for Ascend something I would have never expected nor seen
from the Ascend of the old days, although from the recent stock 
fallout and other items, I just hope it's not too late.

Jason Nealis
Director Internet Operations
Internet Access
Erols Internet

> 
> >I have been a staunch and loyal supporter of all things Ascend, fending off
> >marketing people from Cisco, Livingston, Hayes and US Robotics because I
> >believed Ascend was the best.  Folks, the very foundations of that belief
> >are being shaken to the core.  My customers are losing their faith in us,
> >and I am losing my faith in you.  I hope you listen well to this because
> >from what I hear from your own tech support people and read in this list, I
> >am not the only one.  The boss is looking at/is spending thousands of
> >dollars to set up a parallel system, one to handle 33.6 or less and ISDN,
> >another to support 56Kflex.  In the past where we spend our money would not
> >have been questioned, now.....do we go with Ascend or someone else?
> 
> Well, we do have the commitment of all relevant parties to "fix" this
> software release issue. The specific HDLC problem is being worked on as
> the highest priority. In the meantime, we are *ALWAYS* open to alternative
> ways to workaround problems like this - just request that the issue be
> escalated to support management, and we will take care of business!
> 
> 
> 
> Kevin
> 
> 
> ++ Ascend Users Mailing List ++
> To unsubscribe:	send unsubscribe to ascend-users-request@bungi.com
> To get FAQ'd:	<http://www.nealis.net/ascend/faq>
> 

++ Ascend Users Mailing List ++
To unsubscribe:	send unsubscribe to ascend-users-request@bungi.com
To get FAQ'd:	<http://www.nealis.net/ascend/faq>
References: