<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 11:27 AM, Susan Stewart <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:hedgemage@binaryredneck.net">hedgemage@binaryredneck.net</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
Victor Kane wrote:<br>
<snip><br>
<div class="im">> They want a website application that will last several years and have<br>
> every right to receive that. Only if they ask for new functionality and<br>
> the cost of implementing it is cheaper if an upgrade is involved should<br>
> the client be expected to change to the new shiny Drupal just because we<br>
> are excited about it. I am against the "no support after 9 months" thing<br>
> and in favor of backport support.<br>
<br>
</div>I *absolutely* disagree here. If a client does not believe that a web<br>
site is a living, breathing thing requiring regular care and<br>
maintenance, the developer has failed to educate him/her.<br>
<br>
I often use an automobile analogy when explaining this to client: sure,<br>
you can buy a new car and never change the oil, just as you can get a<br>
new web site and never do a security or bugfix update. However, it<br>
won't run smoothly for long. Similarly, regardless of how well you keep<br>
up with oil changes, the breaks and tires must eventually be replaced --<br>
yes, it can be expensive, but not as expensive as getting in a car<br>
accident -- it's part of car ownership.<br>
</blockquote><div><br>Your analogy is flawed. If I own a car as I own a website, a new version is akin to getting a new car. Essentially you are trading in your existing car with what ever value it has left and buying a new one. Replacing the brakes is necessary maintenance work. Just because the community at large isn't supporting the software anymore doesn't mean it is worthless. There are other conditions that if the client is made aware can choose to use the EOL software. Perhaps the timing is wrong, perhaps the funds needed to be diverted to a more critical part of the business. If security is the major concern for upgrading, having a backport available outside the community should be considered a valuable resource to get a business through the period of EOL. Further we can look to existing businesses in other sectors that routinely give support to EOL products, as the product gets older the prices go up. At a certain point, balanced with the risk it becomes more attractive to make the move. Point being it isn't unheard of for a vendor to continue to support a product after EOL. Now I do realize this is FOSS, but the fact remains different consultants can offer different solutions and that is ok. We don't need to be complelety black and white in how we handle customer transitions.<br>
<br>I hope this doesn't come across as flame bait, it isn't. It is simply a viewpoint. I certainly respect yours, and see you have some principles that work for you and you should stick to those.<br> </div></div>
<br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br>Christian<br>