We have been hotfix averse in our 5.3 environment and endeavor to do better in 6. While realizing the burden that testing and regression testing incurs on every one - not to mention the 'Oops, we didn't test for that' PRD incidents that happens from time to time, I was wondering if others could share their patching strategy for Tidal.
I would be interested to know:
Thanks again - this forum is really useful to to learn how other companies use, manage and maintain this tool. It is one of our most critical applications so we really thread lightly on any changes to PRD.
Thanks for your response. Just to give you an idea of what were are thinking about on our end:
Frequency of patching:
We want to patch a minimum of twice a year. The frequency may increase once we get the confidence. Currrently being in the middle of upgrade we patch 6.1 a lot as we try to get to that stable (to us) version. There is really not a lot of new features we want to implement and we tend err on the thinking that a known set of bugs in a mostly stable environment is easier to live with compared to applying a new hotfix with unknown bugs.
One snag I already see though is browser version support since IE and FF patch a lot and they are mostly security related.
A stripped down version of the upgrade testing scripts + testing readme items that impact us = what we hope users will validate after hotfix is applied to DEV. Then after 2 - 3 months, we apply to PRD once all signoffs are complete.
Per automating the testing portion, I guess its easy enough to create a jobgroup that has different types of job and schedule scenarios. The user interaction with the interface is the issue since we don't have tools to simulate that yet. I have used a tool called Badboy in the past - dunno if that is overkill compared to just testing manually. If we patch more frequently than twice a year it may make more sense to.
Strategy for Patching: