IBM Sustainability Join forces with like-minded peers and empower a sustainable future together! Join / Log in
I downloaded DOORS 9727 a while back.
I was going to implement it recently but first went to double check if I had the latest version.
IBM software website currently lists 9727 as the latest version so I thought I was good to go
A bit later on I stumble upon this technote hidden away on an IBM Support web page while googling something else
Apparently there are 2 versions of 9727 with different build numbers
The later version includes a critical fix
I think this is poor product management to release a critical patch fix and give it an identical release number and then, to compound the problem, upload it to the software site with no flags or indicators for anyone browsing that this is not the same as the earlier 9727 available from the same place
Yes there is a note in the readme but that is it.
I think a critical fix of this kind should be flagged front and centre
When I worked in the DOORS development team many years ago any fix that required a public release automatically generated a new minor fix version number with no exceptions
Sean, thanks for raising this. I will discuss it with the team.
I completely agree: A (critical) fix must get a different version, not only an other build number.This really helps (us) to have a clear overview about and a good reference to specific versions, even in environments with hundreds/thousands of installations.
Especially in this case, it was really hard for us as we found a crashing-bug (known 2 month before! -> PH54171) in 220.127.116.11 ("PH54171: CRASH IN V18.104.22.168 CLIENTS IF CHANGING EDIT MODES WITH VIEW CONTAINING A FILTER")