TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
Subject:RE: More genteel than "Sanity Checked" From:Stuart Burnfield <slb -at- westnet -dot- com -dot- au> To:techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com Date:Thu, 31 May 2007 11:04:40 +0800
I worked for a software company in a similar situation to yours. Their
product ran on various flavours of UNIX. They had a few 'reference
platforms' such as Solaris, HP/UX and AIX on which the product would be
tested for each new release. I think they referred to this as
certification--"Product 4.0 has been certified on Solaris 7.0 and 8.0
(SPARC and Intel); HP/UX 9.0; and AIX 4.1 and 4.2." Other platforms
would be certified on request.
Where a customer or potential customer was still running an old or
obscure UNIX OS, it wasn't always feasible to provide a certified
version of the product. In these cases they might be offered a near
equivalent port on the understanding that we believed it should work but
couldn't guarantee it because it wasn't certified.
The important thing is not thinking of a neat phrase to describe the
level of testing, it's the level of support you're prepared to give. So
I would want to be very sure that the customer understands this:
"The software has been through some basic tests but not the full test
suite. We believe it should work but we can't guarantee it as we would
for a certified version. If you encounter a problem we will investigate
it on a 'best efforts' basis but can't guarantee to fix it."
'Sanity tested' or 'smoke tested' doesn't come close to describing this
and I can't think of another short phrase that would. Just make sure
both you and the customer have the same understanding of what is and
isn't supported.
In the table of supported platforms and versions, I would categorise
platforms as either Certified, Tested but not Certified, or Not
Supported. Define each of these categories below the table.
From: Kevin McLauchlan:
Let's say that the product is hardware and its associated software
(drivers, api, tools/utilities, etc.) and firmware.
Let's further say that it is meant to run with several operating systems
(and sub-species thereof).
Let's say that earlier versions have supported several versions of
Solaris. Let's say that a couple of years ago we started compiling for
Solaris on Solaris 8, allowing us to support Solaris 8, 9, and 10... all
of which get thoroughly tested (along with all the other platforms) at
each release.
Let's further say that hardly anybody (among our customers) still uses
Solaris 8, so we dropped formal support for it, a release or two ago.
Let's say that, a few days before release, a customer spoke up thusly:
"Well, we do have a few old Solaris 8 boxes in our deployed universe,
and we really do want to roll out your new release, across the board -
we'd hate to have to support multiple versions of your product
throughout our organization if we can avoid that. Can we run your new
version on the Solaris 8 boxes until we get around to upgrading them?"
We said "Sure! We're quite confident - we'll just do a quick check of
the highlights, then we'll support it on a best-efforts basis. Are you
ok with it not being put through the full wringer like the rest of the
offering?"
Now, in the table of supported platforms and versions, that should
appear as...???
See what I mean? We want neither to shout it from the rooftops, nor to
hide anything, but we do want to make a distinction.
Does anybody work in an industry where you routinely show product being
qualified in various circumstances and configurations as a range of
levels of "supported" rather than just black'n'white "supported" or "not
supported" and nothing in between?
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Create HTML or Microsoft Word content and convert to Help file formats or
printed documentation. Features include support for Windows Vista & 2007
Microsoft Office, team authoring, plus more. http://www.DocToHelp.com/TechwrlList
Now shipping: Help & Manual 4 with RoboHelp(r) import! New editor,
full Unicode support. Create help files, web-based help and PDF in up
to 106 languages with Help & Manual: http://www.helpandmanual.com
---
You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as archive -at- web -dot- techwr-l -dot- com -dot-