2 Replies Latest reply on Jun 15, 2016 5:31 AM by sbr2

    DSM Patch intervals


      Hi all,

      there are some discussions about patch content vs. patch intervals and, of course, QA times needed to properly test each patch we are releasing.

      So I'd like to ask the community members:

      • Are you satisfied with the 6 week intervals we try to maintain?
      • Or would you prefer longer intervals?
        • If so, should we use the additional time to include more content or do more QA?
      • Or would you prefer less content and shorter intervals?

      Looking forward to your thoughts!


        • 1. Re: DSM Patch intervals
          Klaus Salger Expert



          I think that should depend on the patch.

          Patching of critical problems might need a short interval.

          Just the critical stuff, complete Q&A, fast rollout.


          Less critical problems might wait longer and be rolled out together with others.


          If problems arise I'd like to get

          - fast information

          - workarounds

          - Patches that are very well tested so that I can rely on them

          - a tested fallback in case things go wrong


          By the way, some information about the internal Q&A process would help to assess the need of onsite testing before rolling a DSM patch out to production.




          1 of 1 people found this helpful
          • 2. Re: DSM Patch intervals
            sbr2 Expert

            Hello Peter,

            like Klaus it's similar for us.


            First of all, we need a fast information. I the old times there was a Website where partners could read about the existing Problems. That would be really helpful.

            For the Hotfix packages it would be good to have more QA. Because in bigger Environment it needs sometimes days to implement a new HF. So not every HF could be installed.


            Hope this information helps.


            Best regards


            1 of 1 people found this helpful