On Fri, 26 Jan 1996 18:11:50 GMT Jon Cohen said:
>Howard Pringle <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>I am somewhat surprised that somebody has not started a thread on
>>this topic already but am I the only one to wonder just what the
>>heck is happening on the quality assurance front at HP with the
>>Express 3, linkedit, Powerpatch 3, Powerpatch 4 mess.  [..snip..]
 
>I don't know if this assures you; I hope it does.  I'd be interested
>in feedback, especially from those who have experience with the
>quality of releases other than MPE/iX releases.
 
At least we HAVE patches (contrast with old classic days when the answer
was "fixed in the next release") and we don't have "boatloads" of patches
(refer to the HP-UX patch pages).  [Some] Patches are online now for you
to download via the web.  PatchManager and some other goodies (including
multiple operating environments) are on their way.  Obviously the methods
of notification, delivery, application, and QA are changing for the future
good, and perhaps we are seeing some of the growing pains of that process.
The "big mixup" is because of a paranoid patch procedure trying it's best
not to corrupt your system by doing extensive checking/qualification of the
patches in question -- at least the *intention* was admirable.  I think we
should keep this in mind in spite of the uncharacteristically "unstable"
appearance of the recent Powerpatch/Express/etc cycle.
 
HP has to walk a fine line, after all, between QA and delivery.  After all,
we have posted complaints about this topic right along with other threads
bemoaning the delays of the 5.5 release date.  There is a trade-off at play
here, and IMHO I'm glad to see early availability, especially when combined
with readily available fixes/patches as the recent online patch additions
exhibit.  A few customers have been adversely affected, but I don't think
this should be construed as a failure of the process (has there ever been a
release that didn't zap *somebody* in the user community?).
 
Jeff Kell <[log in to unmask]>