Sage 100

Is it REALLY that difficult to stay closer to the PU releases?  It appears everything above is one PU behind.

In my very humble opinion, an ISV should NOT be allowed to be endorsed by Sage if they don't have current releases available for the current PU by x days after Sage's release.

Is it REALLY that difficult to stay closer to the PU releases?  It appears everything above is one PU behind.

I agree, Wayne. I feel they should NOT be endorsed if they can't provide timely support too!

In my very humble opinion, an ISV should NOT be allowed to be endorsed by Sage if they don't have current releases available for the current PU by x days after Sage's release.

Is it REALLY that difficult to stay closer to the PU releases?  It appears everything above is one PU behind.

I agree, Wayne. I feel they should NOT be endorsed if they can't provide timely support too!

In my very humble opinion, an ISV should NOT be allowed to be endorsed by Sage if they don't have current releases available for the current PU by x days after Sage's release.

Is it REALLY that difficult to stay closer to the PU releases?  It appears everything above is one PU behind.

Wouldn't this be a win-win for any ISV that went the endorsed route?

I have customers with integrations who are  hung out to dry where the customer must decide when to jump in and upgrade. Who wants to upgrade to 2024.0 only to be told by Sage and likely the ISV that every potential bug should first be diagnosed by installing 2024 PU1? 

Some of these ISVs have an entire proce$$ for assisting with upgrades - including basic PU upgrades -  which can span one or more months.  So I'm hesitant to recommend to a customer that they upgrade before installing at least the first PU 1.

@Brett Zimmerman I don't remember hearing that Sage had changed their policy on upgrade speed requirements for endorsed solutions but I guess it's possible.

I agree, Wayne. I feel they should NOT be endorsed if they can't provide timely support too!

In my very humble opinion, an ISV should NOT be allowed to be endorsed by Sage if they don't have current releases available for the current PU by x days after Sage's release.

Is it REALLY that difficult to stay closer to the PU releases?  It appears everything above is one PU behind.

The other issue I JUST ran into -- NOT RELATED TO SCANCO - is that a customer had another ISV whose renewal increased 21% ( Sage says the Sage -subscription increases should be limited to 10% ) and the ISVs apparently have free range on how high their annual increases can go. It seems like this would be another good area for a Sage Endorsed Solution to have some guidelines -- (a) Release within xx days after a Sage release and (b) annual increases limited to the same % as Sage ( or some publicly stated policy on ISV increases ).

Wouldn't this be a win-win for any ISV that went the endorsed route?

I have customers with integrations who are  hung out to dry where the customer must decide when to jump in and upgrade. Who wants to upgrade to 2024.0 only to be told by Sage and likely the ISV that every potential bug should first be diagnosed by installing 2024 PU1? 

Some of these ISVs have an entire proce$$ for assisting with upgrades - including basic PU upgrades -  which can span one or more months.  So I'm hesitant to recommend to a customer that they upgrade before installing at least the first PU 1.

@Brett Zimmerman I don't remember hearing that Sage had changed their policy on upgrade speed requirements for endorsed solutions but I guess it's possible.

I agree, Wayne. I feel they should NOT be endorsed if they can't provide timely support too!

In my very humble opinion, an ISV should NOT be allowed to be endorsed by Sage if they don't have current releases available for the current PU by x days after Sage's release.

Is it REALLY that difficult to stay closer to the PU releases?  It appears everything above is one PU behind.