SR's & Bugs

So, I just need to understand what the policy is supposed to be.....

I've had bug's raised as a result of a SR, then the SR gets closed and
the bug is "employees only"....so I've lost complete view of when the
bug will be fixed with the SR providing no workaround.

This seems to be completely counter intuitive.


--
-"Also now available in 'G+'
(http://plus.google.com/+BenWalter-Kiwi) and 'Website'
(https://www.isam.kiwi/) format".- ;)
ScorpionSting's Profile: https://forums.novell.com/member.php?userid=1663
View this thread: https://forums.novell.com/showthread.php?t=505154

Comments

  • ScorpionStingScorpionSting Established Member
    Hmmm....got call as result of Survey against one of these....both have
    been reopened now


    --
    -"Also now available in 'G+'
    (http://plus.google.com/+BenWalter-Kiwi) and 'Website'
    (https://www.isam.kiwi/) format".- ;)
    ScorpionSting's Profile: https://forums.novell.com/member.php?userid=1663
    View this thread: https://forums.novell.com/showthread.php?t=505154
  • Hello,

    Thank you for asking the question.
    Normally when a defect needs longer to resolve, more than 1 month, the
    engineer may chose to temporarily close the SR.
    Temporarily means both customer and engineer would still get automated
    email notifications every time the defect is updated.

    Once the fix is officially available, the engineer would re-activate the
    SR, and follow up with the customer to make sure it does what it is
    supposed to do.
    If the fix does not meet the needed requirements, Engineering needs to
    follow up the defect.

    Even if the SR is closed, activities would still happen.
    Instead of the SR being used as a place holder, the defect is used
    instead.
    Even though there is no visibility, the SR is still listed as Closed,
    Awaiting Engineering, or Awaiting Public Patch, in NCC.
    It becomes the engineer's responsibility to close the loop.

    I hope the above answers your question.

    Regards
    Tarik


    --
    tbaki
    tbaki's Profile: https://forums.novell.com/member.php?userid=13755
    View this thread: https://forums.novell.com/showthread.php?t=505154
  • ScorpionStingScorpionSting Established Member
    Theory sounds okay, but I think reality is very different. As a
    customer, I need a direct contact point to check in when the resolution
    to the defect is going to be released and this is not possible if the SR
    is closed off and the bug is inaccessible.

    Even when I have had bugs tied to an SR, the only piece of information I
    ever received is the notification of the release several days after the
    patch is actually out (likely when the bug is marked resolved). This
    alone is insufficient.


    --
    -"Also now available in 'G+'
    (http://plus.google.com/+BenWalter-Kiwi) and 'Website'
    (https://www.isam.kiwi/) format".- ;)
    ScorpionSting's Profile: https://forums.novell.com/member.php?userid=1663
    View this thread: https://forums.novell.com/showthread.php?t=505154
  • Thank you for highlighting ways to improve our customer interactions for
    defect related issues.
    If the theory does not work as expected, we need to review it.

    Defect updates should not really be once , and only after final release
    of a fix.
    It should be with every status change of the defect, which is meant for
    external communication.

    If I understand you correctly, you are using the SR as a sounding board
    to ask for regular defect updates.
    This is still a manual process needing the engineer to regularly update
    customers, and this could also fail.

    If you are interested in a time frame for a defect fix, then I would
    recommend that defects needs to be properly prioritized, in order for
    developers to fix it in an acceptable time frame.
    For this, both business and operational impact are captured and
    communicated back to Engineering.

    If on the other hand, a defect is not considered as high priority by
    customers, then it will likely take more than a month to fix.
    This is when automated defect updates are generally accepted by
    customers.

    An SR remaining open for over 3, 6, and 12 months due to defects, hardly
    adds values, and does not reflect good practice..

    If you were automatically updated via defect, every-time it changes
    status, would that be acceptable?

    I must reiterate that the SR is only "temporarily" closed until a fix is
    released, or until such a time customers ask for it to be reactivated.


    --
    tbaki
    tbaki's Profile: https://forums.novell.com/member.php?userid=13755
    View this thread: https://forums.novell.com/showthread.php?t=505154
  • ScorpionStingScorpionSting Established Member
    When a bug is marked for "Micro Focus Employees Only", no external
    communication would occur. And as this is 100% the case when a bug is
    logged via a SR, then no bug update affects the SR. Then with bugs I log
    (making them external) and tie them to a SR, almost 100% of the
    engineering updates are private so, again, the process falls apart.

    I have at least 2 SR's and their relative bugs that are completely
    stopping us from moving any version of IDM 4.6.x beyond the DEV
    environment. These are critical as IDM 4.5.x current ends support
    February 2018 (which we can't meet as it is with December and January
    always unavailable for changes to our environments). I know one of the
    bugs is tied to bigger issues around the ECMA implementation in the 4.6
    release, so is high priority with engineering.

    I have SR's that are almost 2 years old, simply because of the lack of
    any traction by engineering. Without the SR remaining open, I wouldn't
    have front line available to always be chasing engineering for a
    response....and now making them 100% under the Product Manager radar.

    All in all, the whole engineering process needs a complete overhaul if
    any SR/Bug process is going to work correctly....until that happens,
    making promises about "system notification functionality" would be
    pointless.


    --
    -"Also now available in 'G+'
    (http://plus.google.com/+BenWalter-Kiwi) and 'Website'
    (https://www.isam.kiwi/) format".- ;)
    ScorpionSting's Profile: https://forums.novell.com/member.php?userid=1663
    View this thread: https://forums.novell.com/showthread.php?t=505154
  • If you say the defects are high priority then the SR's should not be
    closed in the first place. This way the engineer provides regular
    updates until closure.

    Each product portfolio has its own bugzilla guidelines. Maybe it is the
    case for IDM that every defect logged is marked employee only, but this
    is not the case for other products. I will investigate and let you know.
    Just to clarify that we are not talking about engineering updates being
    visible and shareable via email.
    I am referring to the defect status change.

    I was not making promises, I was seeking your feedback. Anyway, it has
    come across loud and clear.


    --
    tbaki
    tbaki's Profile: https://forums.novell.com/member.php?userid=13755
    View this thread: https://forums.novell.com/showthread.php?t=505154
  • KevinKevin Knowledge Partner
    ScorpionSting wrote:

    >
    > All in all, the whole engineering process needs a complete overhaul if
    > any SR/Bug process is going to work correctly


    I concur completely!

    I have raised similar issues in the past as have other Knowledge
    Partners. We would be happy to provide our input if it would help
    resolve these issues.

    It's unfortunate that different products have different rules and
    processes. When dealing with vendors, Customers expect issues to be
    resolved in a consistent manner independent of the specific product!


    --
    Kevin Boyle - Knowledge Partner
    If you find this post helpful and are logged into the web interface,
    please show your appreciation and click on the star below this post.
    Thank you.
Sign In or Register to comment.