Blogs

Continuous Software Delivery Model for Campus Solutions

By David Baugh posted 03-12-2009 02:56 PM

  
We've been asking that Oracle address the pain and costs associated with upgrades and get new functionality to us faster.  Oracle has heard us and is releasing a Continuous Software Delivery Model for Campus Solutions.  For more information, see Stan Jakubik's letter, which includes a link to the FAQ.  Also, check out the TAG document, 'Year in the Life of Campus Solutions'.  This document provides additional documentation about this new development.  While I understand implementing this new model may take some work, I think there are some real long-term benefits to this change.  What do you think?  
4 comments
0 views

Related Content

Comments

Archive User
03-31-2009 06:52 PM

HCM business drivers

Our HCM customers in Higher Education should take a look at the HCM 9.1 Value Proposition.  It is now posted on Metalink3.  There are some neat new features for Education in HCM 9.1.  Your intent to actually use those new 9.1 features is a key ingredient in the decision of when to upgrade, split or no split.

Mary Jo Chisholm
03-20-2009 01:43 PM

What is the commitment to PeopleSoft's HCM product?

I realize Oracle is committed to supporting and enhancing the Campus Solutions module of PeopleSoft.  What is Oracle's commitment to supporting and enhancing the HCM module of PeopleSoft when Oracle has at least two other HR modules (Oracle E-business Suite, JD Edwards, etc)

Especially when Peoplesoft Campus Solutions and PeopleSoft HCM will be separate entities, it will not matter which HR application we use. 

Personally, I think you will find Oracle putting all kinds of development effort into what they consider their best HR product and stop enhancing the others.  That way, the customers will all eventually jump their current HR application and go to that best Oracle HR product.  Oracle will then be able to see a huge cost savings in development effort and not have to support so many applications.  It makes perfect business sense as to why Oracle would want to do that.

Hue Lam
03-18-2009 06:45 PM

Is this a gain for School which has CS & HCM in one instance?

We have both in one instance and I am not convinced this is a good thing for us.  Normally, we do a major upgrade every 2 or 3 years and CS/HCM is upgraded at the same time.  We can decide when we want to do the upgrade.  After that, we can rest for a while.

 With this model, we can be doing CS upgrades all year round even though it is smaller.  And it appears that we may be forced  to do certain so-called feature pack upgrade at a certain time because of the bundles.

In addition, we have to split HCM from our CS database and have to do major upgrades to the HCM instance like before.  So what do we gain exactly?  More disk space consumed to hold 2 databases and more hardware required for app/batch servers and an aditional data hub.

Schools, which have separate CS and HCM instances may like this model.  Sorry, I am not a fan - not with what I heard so far.

Archive User
03-13-2009 11:53 AM

I think it's a very positive step.

Clearly if Oracle can eliminate the need for major upgrades, which are always costly and time consuming, it will be huge!   It's a legitimate concern as to how much work will be required to implement the new Feature Packs, hence whether we will be in "continuous upgrade" mode, but it seems to me that the approach they've announced of delivering the new functionality "turned off" so that each institution can enable it if and when they choose to, makes a whole lot of sense.

I know some of the institutions that are on CS 8.9 and have been getting ready to gear up for an upgrade to CS 9.1 are probably a bit stunned by the news, and perhaps wish they had known about this earlier.  But I think that the fact that once they upgrade to CS 9.0 they will be done with major CS upgrades should be a positive thing.

Clearly the biggest uncertainty and concern is what the details of the HCM/CS split will look like, once HCM 9.1 is released and institutions want to upgrade to it.  But again my impression is that Mark Armstrong and his team are well aware of this concern and are working hard, and smart, to make that transition as smooth as possible.