X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Received: by onstor-exch02.onstor.net 
	id <01C749B6.CE469214@onstor-exch02.onstor.net>; Mon, 5 Feb 2007 22:19:49 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C749B6.CE469214"
References: <WEBMAILsrQruvgsPXQU000003c5@mail.onstor.com> <20070205213212.2244c81e@ripper.onstor.net>
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
Subject: RE: PERFORCE change 22636 for review
Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2007 22:19:49 -0800
Message-ID: <BB375AF679D4A34E9CA8DFA650E2B04E0133632E@onstor-exch02.onstor.net>
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
Thread-Topic: PERFORCE change 22636 for review
Thread-Index: AcdJsCj4tuBtzWeuRTGzpLEhQZ6rsgAAUN1b
From: "Ken Renshaw" <ken.renshaw@onstor.com>
To: "Andy Sharp" <andy.sharp@onstor.com>
Cc: "Jay Michlin" <jay.michlin@onstor.com>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------_=_NextPart_001_01C749B6.CE469214
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I'm not even sure what you're last sentence means Andy, if your quip was =
true wouldn't we have free licenses??

//depot/nfx-test/... is the QA test repository that uses a shared p4 =
license because every test client in the lab needs it, and licenses are =
issued per real human, not per machine ( that's even according to =
Perforce's license agreement ). It's just not feasible to license 100's =
of machines that are shared by many QA engineers in automated scripted =
test environments. The configuration management is at the machine level =
in this case. What *is* a foul here is using localhost.localdomain as =
the client name, which should be something like c9r20-linux ( computer 9 =
on rack 20 running linux ). This makes perfect sense to everyone else =
and is what we will continue to use for client specs in our test =
environment.

I agree all developers should have their own licenses. In the past it =
was decided by management including Jerry to not buy licenses for all of =
HCL but to use the client space to denote it, e.g. =
perforce@sahayaj-lambo, even though some/many of the HCL folk do have =
their own. If management would like to change this that's perfectly fine =
with me, and I'll collect the quote and get a PR written up for =
signature for any we are desirous of, but talking down to me like this =
in the wrong context is not helpful.

The real problem in not keeping up to date with licenses is that dev =
hires people, doesn't plan for it by telling me beforehand, they start =
work, then the complaints ( instead of requests ) roll in. Misguidedly I =
have to say.

-Ken



-----Original Message-----
From: Andy Sharp
Sent: Mon 2/5/2007 9:32 PM
To: Ken Renshaw
Cc: Jay Michlin
Subject: Re: PERFORCE change 22636 for review
=20
Ken,

We really need to know who checks in changes.  I can't tell who checked
this in, can you?  There was another one that had no identifiable
person associated with it recently.  We simply must get enough licenses
to get everyone their own account. Unless we're giving Perforce a free
filer or something.

a


On 5 Feb 2007 16:50:30 -0800 Ken Renshaw <ken.renshaw@onstor.com> wrote:

> Change 22636 by perforce@localhost.localdomain on 2007/02/05 16:48:40
>=20
> 	Replacing -v usage by list
> 	Reviewed by: maryl
>=20
> Affected files ...
>=20
> ... //depot/nfx-test/tst-qasnap/snaplist.sh#5 edit
>=20


------_=_NextPart_001_01C749B6.CE469214
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV=3D"Content-Type" CONTENT=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META NAME=3D"Generator" CONTENT=3D"MS Exchange Server version =
6.5.7650.28">
<TITLE>RE: PERFORCE change 22636 for review</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<!-- Converted from text/plain format -->

<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>I'm not even sure what you're last sentence means =
Andy, if your quip was true wouldn't we have free licenses??<BR>
<BR>
//depot/nfx-test/... is the QA test repository that uses a shared p4 =
license because every test client in the lab needs it, and licenses are =
issued per real human, not per machine ( that's even according to =
Perforce's license agreement ). It's just not feasible to license 100's =
of machines that are shared by many QA engineers in automated scripted =
test environments. The configuration management is at the machine level =
in this case. What *is* a foul here is using localhost.localdomain as =
the client name, which should be something like c9r20-linux ( computer 9 =
on rack 20 running linux ). This makes perfect sense to everyone else =
and is what we will continue to use for client specs in our test =
environment.<BR>
<BR>
I agree all developers should have their own licenses. In the past it =
was decided by management including Jerry to not buy licenses for all of =
HCL but to use the client space to denote it, e.g. =
perforce@sahayaj-lambo, even though some/many of the HCL folk do have =
their own. If management would like to change this that's perfectly fine =
with me, and I'll collect the quote and get a PR written up for =
signature for any we are desirous of, but talking down to me like this =
in the wrong context is not helpful.<BR>
<BR>
The real problem in not keeping up to date with licenses is that dev =
hires people, doesn't plan for it by telling me beforehand, they start =
work, then the complaints ( instead of requests ) roll in. Misguidedly I =
have to say.<BR>
<BR>
-Ken<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
-----Original Message-----<BR>
From: Andy Sharp<BR>
Sent: Mon 2/5/2007 9:32 PM<BR>
To: Ken Renshaw<BR>
Cc: Jay Michlin<BR>
Subject: Re: PERFORCE change 22636 for review<BR>
<BR>
Ken,<BR>
<BR>
We really need to know who checks in changes.&nbsp; I can't tell who =
checked<BR>
this in, can you?&nbsp; There was another one that had no =
identifiable<BR>
person associated with it recently.&nbsp; We simply must get enough =
licenses<BR>
to get everyone their own account. Unless we're giving Perforce a =
free<BR>
filer or something.<BR>
<BR>
a<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
On 5 Feb 2007 16:50:30 -0800 Ken Renshaw &lt;ken.renshaw@onstor.com&gt; =
wrote:<BR>
<BR>
&gt; Change 22636 by perforce@localhost.localdomain on 2007/02/05 =
16:48:40<BR>
&gt;<BR>
&gt; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Replacing -v usage by list<BR>
&gt; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Reviewed by: maryl<BR>
&gt;<BR>
&gt; Affected files ...<BR>
&gt;<BR>
&gt; ... //depot/nfx-test/tst-qasnap/snaplist.sh#5 edit<BR>
&gt;<BR>
<BR>
</FONT>
</P>

</BODY>
</HTML>
------_=_NextPart_001_01C749B6.CE469214--
