WARNING: This is probably going to be my yearly rant blog posting for 2012. Feel free to just walk away.
Ok, I'm pretty mad right now. I don't want to write this blog post, but I just can't believe what's going on and what I'm being told to do. This should not be happening and I want to do all that I can to make sure this sort of thing does not happen again. I'm reminded of the Holy Discontent talk at 2005 Leadership Summit that started me on the path I'm now on.
Let's back up a few months. We were told we had to upgrade from our mostly stable Arena 2010.1.x to 2011.1.500 because the background check service provider that we use with Arena was changing on 3/1. Up against the wall, we reluctantly upgraded. A month later (3/29) I got an email from Arena saying a known bug (in their new code; the code that was supposed to be the fix for the "problem") would be fixed in an upcoming 2011.2.400. Herein starts the real topic of this post. Why was I being told a bug fix would be put into a new release of the product and not a .600 patch fix? Semver (Semantic Versioning) is all but the standard way of doing things now, and even if you don't version using the X.Y.Z form, every software vendor knows you issue patches to fix bugs. You don't ask your customers to upgrade to a newer version (which in almost certainty) has it's own set of bugs and changes to deal with. Me and others complained, and today I was told the vendor is now going to create a .600 patch -- it should be ready in another month or so (around the end of May?).
What? Two+ months to issue a patch? Are you kidding me? What is this patchy philosophy?
A patch from a paid vendor need not take this long to issue. I understand QA testing for a full release takes time, but a full QA/test cycle is not needed for a patch because you should be changing only one piece of code and testing that one piece of code.
In the meantime, several times a week (we've had 10 failures out of approximately 30 requests in the past month) I was asked by the vendor to have our ministry assistant using the following steps to work around the problem:
Steps for identifying and retrieving outstanding background checks
containing Alerts
1)
Run the agent configuration utility on the Arena
webserver and click on the background check agent. Go to the notifications tab
and identify the email address that alerts are set to go to.

2) Access the noted account and look for
an alert email containing the information shown below.
<IMAGE REMOVED>

3)
If
such an email is found, they will need to contact Melissa ****** at ABC @ 800-***-****
ext. *** or ***@serviceprovidervendor.com.
Request that she email them the Name and URL of all individuals with an Alert on
their record. They should receive a url for each person that looks something
like: https://blahblahblah/foo/bar?ReportID=**********.
4) Once they receive the info from ABC,
they would then do the following (access to Arena and SQL required):
1. In Arena, go to the affected background
check and click on it. In the url it will provide you with the check id, take
note as that’s the id in the arena database. Repeat for each check in the list
that ABC provided.
2. Go to SQL and run:
select
background_check_id,status,result,results_link from you_have_got_to_be_kidding_me where background_check_id =
x (where x is the id number of the
check). Only the id and status should have a value, result and result link
should be blank.
3.
Run:
update
foo_bar_blah_check set status
= 4, result = 'Complete - Record',results_link = 'URL that ABC provided'
where
background_check_id = x
5) After they have completed step 4, they
can either manually stop and restart their agents to pull the background checks
now, or they can wait for the agent to cycle and pull down the background
checks.
6) To determine if the background check record
has been successfully retrieved, run:
select background_check_id,status,result,results_link, results_blob_id from
more_fun_with_sql_tables where background_check_id = x
The check has been successfully retrieved if there is a value in
the results_blob_id field, note the value and proceed to step 7.
7)
To
confirm the existence of the background check document, run:
select created_by,modified_by,file_ext,mime_type,original_file_name from
big_blobby_table where blob_id = x (x
being the value noted in step 6)
And to complete the process, updating
the document so that it can be viewed, run:
Update that_big_blobby_table_again Set file_ext = 'pdf', Original_file_name
= 'BackgroundCheckReport.pdf'
Where file_ext like
'cfm?reportid=%'.
* I've changed certain tables/URLs/names for obvious security reasons and to protect the mostly innocent.
If I had the source code, I would probably just fix this myself instead of writing this stupid blog post. I realize I'm setting the Rock ChMS initiative which I've joined to meet these same expectations -- even though it's is a free and open source product. I just don't think it's reasonable to have to run broken in a broken state for two months while a patch is being assembled.