Where are we at with the CMS upgrade service

(Talk) #1

A few weeks ago I (and probably most of us) received an email from Squiz detailing likely significant changes to the upgrade process, namely that they were reviewing the distribution of upgrades (and the automatic upgrade script) and were seeking input/feedback.

 

I responded to the email and was told I'd get more information the following week, but suspect there may have been so many responses that it may not have been possible to follow them all up.

 

I used to have a bookmark to information on the Squiz website about how individuals/organisations qualified for upgrades, but I lost it (and can't seem to find the info on Google or the Squiz website - has it gone?).

 

I think the current policy is something like organisations making less than $X per year qualify for free upgrades, and I suspect this is what's changing.

 

Does anyone have any thoughts or knowledge about what's happening and the future of Squiz Matrix upgrades?

(John-Paul Syriatowicz) #2

Hi Jeremy

 

There has been a slight delay getting the new process for vetting candidates and approving access completed. Everyone who did have access still has access and we will not change anything without giving everyone proper notice.

 

You are correct in assuming the page about individual/small organisation access has been removed from the site. Our new focus is around Squiz Plus agreements which can be tailored for different organisation's needs.

 

Once the new process is complete (we're nearly there) I will contact you personally to make sure you understand how these changes might you and your business.

 

JP

(Talk) #3

Hi John-Paul, I support subscription to the automatic upgrade script as a service, and it'd be great to be able to point clients/employers to some handy info to explain all of this to them once that's available so thank you. My role in an upgrade scenario would typically be to run the script and perform tests, specifically addressing localised cusomisations/variables.

 

I completely support the idea of vetting clients in order to ensure Squiz receive their dues for development of the CMS, so could I please suggest consideration for some kind of referral/server admin role? I'd like to be able to upgrade my own installation, pay what it's worth, and assist clients by managing the process for them and allowing them to pay what it's worth to Squiz.

 

Cheers :)

(Anthony) #4

I work with a small non-profit charity that use Squiz, and would be very keen to see a policy on updates clearly published here or somewhere everyone (i.e including those of us who use squiz consultancy on an ad-hoc basis but do not have formal support agreements) can review.

 

We have a budget that would allow us to happily pay for a regular upgrade service, and we have an IT provider who would almost certainly have the skills to run those update scripts for us. But as far as I can see the current pricing model links updates that we need with consultancy hours that we dont need, and thereby makes it pretty prohibitive for us to keep up to date, so we fall far behind which in the end means a more complex riskier mega-update rather than simple incremental versions. I'd be all in favour of any changes that introduce a more flexible option that incentivises us pay a fair amount on a regular basis for the right to run regular easy upgrade scripts rather than have to fund a big complex upgrades on a very infrequent basis.

(Talk) #5

I work with a small non-profit charity that use Squiz, and would be very keen to see a policy on updates clearly published here or somewhere everyone (i.e including those of us who use squiz consultancy on an ad-hoc basis but do not have formal support agreements) can review.

 

We have a budget that would allow us to happily pay for a regular upgrade service, and we have an IT provider who would almost certainly have the skills to run those update scripts for us. But as far as I can see the current pricing model links updates that we need with consultancy hours that we dont need, and thereby makes it pretty prohibitive for us to keep up to date, so we fall far behind which in the end means a more complex riskier mega-update rather than simple incremental versions. I'd be all in favour of any changes that introduce a more flexible option that incentivises us pay a fair amount on a regular basis for the right to run regular easy upgrade scripts rather than have to fund a big complex upgrades on a very infrequent basis.

 

You've raised some interesting points. I have some work coming up in a few months that I'll be performing free of charge for some Australian charity organisations - I guess there's not much point speculating about the new arrangements until we've seen the info, but hopefully there are provisions for non-profits.