X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Received: by onstor-exch02.onstor.net 
	id <01C7ACB5.26F897A1@onstor-exch02.onstor.net>; Mon, 11 Jun 2007 21:47:24 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
Subject: RE: code review for 19490
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2007 21:43:36 -0800
Message-ID: <BB375AF679D4A34E9CA8DFA650E2B04E041BF627@onstor-exch02.onstor.net>
In-Reply-To: <20070611190423.3c0cd5e7@ripper.onstor.net>
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
Thread-Topic: code review for 19490
Thread-Index: Aceslf8DRszFnMedQwakQDFjbDRfjAAFrXag
References: <BB375AF679D4A34E9CA8DFA650E2B04E03B43045@onstor-exch02.onstor.net><BB375AF679D4A34E9CA8DFA650E2B04E03B43046@onstor-exch02.onstor.net> <20070611190423.3c0cd5e7@ripper.onstor.net>
From: "Brian DeForest" <brian.deforest@onstor.com>
To: "Andy Sharp" <andy.sharp@onstor.com>

I hear you, but also think these are not unreasonable usability
improvements. Can we do without them?  Sure.  Am I religious about this?
No.  However, I chose not to fight this battle because the time it takes
to have this email discussion is longer than the time it takes to make
this minor improvement, and also because I was willing to let QA win
this one in the spirit of working together toward building a better
product (yea, I know, that sounds managerial).  Frankly, I choose which
battles to fight w/ QA, and this isn't one of them (for me at least). =20

FWIW, I'll probably spend additional time having to explain to Sandrine,
Jay, Paul, and Jerry (at least) why we chose not to fix these.  Of
course we can push them to a lower priority too (but then they'll
probably never get fixed).  If you ask anyone who's worked with me for a
while, you'll hear that I'm probably the last person to generate more
work, and I don't like to waste time.  There are actually bigger battles
to be fought, and if it's any consolation, we're fighting them now to
improve the way things are done in Zonda and Cougar and hopefully make
all of our lives easier. =20

Anyway, don't interpret this to mean I'm pissed about this, because I'm
not.  I see your point, perhaps you understand mine.   There is a lot of
room for improvement in our current processes, and I know you're working
hard to initiate some changes, which is definitely appreciated.  =20

Brian


-----Original Message-----
From: Andy Sharp=20
Sent: Monday, June 11, 2007 7:04 PM
To: Brian DeForest
Subject: Re: code review for 19490

No and no.

I don't see anything confusing about the wording of the paragraph.  So
somebody reworded it differently.  So what.  We can keep doing this for
weeks if we want.

The VP of Engineering was very specific about the user needing to be
informed if the upgrade was a success.  Hence the wording.  I'm willing
to entertain ideas on how it can be done away with after the user logs
in once, but so far I haven't been able to think of anything.  I'll
also enterain input from CS.

Let's talk about this.  I looked for you several times today but I
guess you were meetinged all day. As far as I'm concerned, unless there
is a massive stop-ship bug, this should ship, over and done.

On Mon, 11 Jun 2007 18:31:30 -0700 "Brian DeForest"
<brian.deforest@onstor.com> wrote:

> 19491:  Reword second paragraph of the install script introduction to
> make it less confusing

> One more.   Looks like they just requested the motd message
> changed.  =20
>=20
> TED00019490 	Users should not get the "You have successfully
> upgraded" message in subsequent logins post upgrade
>=20
> cw_install.in:
>=20
> 791,792c792
> <                       echo "Welcome.  You have successfully upgraded
> your EverON software to version $N_VERS." > $DEST_DIR/etc/update-motd
> <                       echo "Enjoy." >> $DEST_DIR/etc/update-motd
> ---
> >                       echo "Welcome to EverON software version
> $N_VERS." > $DEST_DIR/etc/update-motd
