Ascend Archive
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: (ASCEND) Re: 5.0Ap34
Robert Tranter wrote:
>
> I think that everyone is missing the larger point with the patch release
> issue. Rather than getting Ascend to test the patch releases better, we
> need to get them to test the full releases better. Why should it that 34
> patches to the 5.0 release to get most of their advertised features to
> function at a basic level. As far as I am aware, HDLC issues are
> stilloutstanding, OSPF still does not work, and we cannot get modem code
> that remains stable from patch to patch.
>
> So we all buy the same old line from Ascend about supporting complex
> systems and that if we can just wait for the next patch/incremental/full
> release all of our problems will be solved. I have had Ascend equipment
> since November of 1995. That tune has gotten really old over two years.
> So I await release 6.0 of the code to fix functionality sold to me 2
> years ago. Any one want ot bet on how many patches it takes in 6.0 to
> fix OSPF, HDLC, etc.?
>
I very much agree with the 2nd paragraph.
I would like to see Ascend publish their formal test procedures
for the p and i releases of each product. I would also like to
see Ascend publish the test results in some easy to read, tabular
format, and a detailed format. This way I should know what they
did or didn't test, and could use this information to help determine
if I should upgrade equipment...
I imagine that we users could make suggestions of scenarios to add
to their test suite.
Am I the only one who thinks this is part of a normal software
QA regimen for production software?
Robert
begin: vcard
fn: Robert Fournerat
n: Fournerat;Robert
org: NetIn.com
adr: 2113 Wilesta;;;Irving;Tx;75061;USA
email;internet: robert@netin.com
title: President
tel;work: 972-790-4858
tel;fax: 972-986-9897
tel;home: 972-986-4023
x-mozilla-cpt: ;0
x-mozilla-html: TRUE
version: 2.1
end: vcard
Follow-Ups:
References: