Resent-Organization: Southern Methodist University
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.notis-l
Date:         Tue, 28 Jul 1992 17:09:15 CST
Comments:     Resent-From: HSAMUELS@UA1VM
Comments:     Originally-From: Barbara <BAUGHMAN@UTDALLAS.BITNET>
Comments:     Resent-From: "Michael J. Stephens" <VB7R0007@SMUVM1>
Comments:     Originally-From: HSAMUELS@UA1VM.BITNET
From:         "Michael J. Stephens" <VB7R0007@SMUVM1.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: PPQ5555:no fix for recall fine problem
              27 Jul 1992 11:31:26 PDT from <LSYS1@UVVM.UVIC.CA>

I also agree with Barbara.  I am not only speaking as a tech1, but also
as the MVS SIG Chair representing all us tech1's.  Circulation is probably
the module that most affects library patrons.  It hits them in the pocket-
book!  Let's here something soonest, NSI!

Michael J. Stephens, Tech1
Sr. Systems Analyst II           *  Phone:    (214) 692-3453
Computer & Information Services  *  FAX:      (214) 692-3449
Southern Methodist University    *  Bitnet:   vb7r0007@smuvm1
Dallas, Tx. 75275-0262           *  Internet: vb7r0007@vm.cis.smu.edu

----------------------------Original message----------------------------
I am in complete agreement with the following message.  I think it would be
most appropriate for NOTIS to make an official statement to the entire
NOTIS user community describing how they intend to respond to the various
circulation problems which have been introduced in LMS 5.0.2.

Harry Samuels
Programmer/Analyst (TECH 1)
University of Alabama
Bitnet: HSAMUELS@UA1VM
Internet: HSAMUELS@UA1VM.UA.EDU
Voice: (205) 348-2877
Fax: (205) 348-9170
----------------------------Original message----------------------------
I would like someone from NSI to respond officially to the note from
Kathleen Matthews.  The 5.0.2 circulation module is full of things that
don't work any more.  I has been my impression also that NSI does not
intend to provide any support for the circulation module (or very
little support) because of the 5.2 rewrite.  I, too, am incredulous at
this stand.  Does NSI truly expect its customers to go from a working
circulation module to a non-working circulation module and stay there
for years until they can release a 'rewrite'?  And what new problems
will the rewrite introduce?

To make things worse, the things that are wrong with the circulation
module all seem to be high-profile mistakes that make our own customers
scream.  The due dates are sometimes wrong, the fines are not calculated
properly, overdue notices and bills are not sent out as advertised.  We
are pulling our hair out.  If NSI can't get us a working version of the
circulation module with 5.1 (or 5.1.1), then I don't want anything to
do with 5.2.

The cause of our problems is not the programming or system design staff.
It doesn't bother me at all that they make some mistakes.  Thats life in
computerland.  The problem is a policy that states that once a release is
out the door, there will be no fixes to that release unless NSI thinks it's
serious enough.  This is especially true of modules that are targetted for
a rewrite.  With this philosophy, NSI customers will NEVER have a release
that really works like it's supposed to.  It's always going to be in the next
release or the next rewrite.  In a way, I see their logic in holding to this
philosophy.  It isn't an arbitrary decision and was made with the sincere
belief that this policy would best serve their customers.  I just don't
agree with it.

So how about it NSI?  What's the official word on fixes for the circulation
module?

Barbara Baughman
TECH1
University of Texas at Dallas
(214) 690-2157
BAUGHMAN@UTDALLAS.BITNET
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU