4 ms·
It's more "this is our contractual obligation, if we're down more than this, then we might not charge you"
by chrsig 5y ago
It's more "this is our contractual obligation, if we're down more than this, then we might not charge you"
- dylan604 5y agoLawyers are involved, so I'd assume some text about "excluding acts of god, sabotage,etc" to weasel their way out of things. They might even be able to get away with "acts of incompetence" how ever a lawyer might phrase that to allow their client to weasel.
- TheCoelacanth 5y agoSLA credits are a thing that actually happen in the industry. I wouldn't automatically assume that they will be able to weasel out of it. They are typically limited to the amount that you actually paid, though, so basically they don't charge you for the time when you couldn't use the product. You usually won't get more than that.
- mywittyname 5y agoThat's a good way to get executive approval to replace a system. Google or Apple can get away with this kind of behavior, I doubt Atlassian can. This outage alone has spurred conversations in slack about how terrible JIRA is and why we should replace it. If this kind of shit was pulled, I can guarantee we'd be on shortcut, linear, or something else in short order.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- MajorBee 5y ago> Google or Apple can get away with this kind of behavior, I doubt Atlassian can Atlassian absolutely can in enterprise settings. In my company (a large cloud company), if JIRA goes down, large swathes of the business will also stall, including code deployment (deployments are tracked through change management JIRA tickets). We also use the DC version of Atlassian products, so presumably we aren't be at the mercy of Atlassian cloud engineers.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]