The post I was trying to write...
This is why Ithink it’s always best to leave it to the experts!
This post came out of a very brief email chat Ryan and I had after I felt some of the frustration Joris expressed here. Though he certainly isn’t the only one to have been a little dismayed about our recent announcements around the supportability of some types of customisation.
Ryan has put together a great post discussing what “Not Supported” actually means, I think he has really hit the web part on the web part page, clearly outlining what he thinks an “unsupported” modification means when it comes to resolving an issue with Microsoft Support Services.
I agree with him completely.
I generally talk about modifications in terms of their “supportability”, that is any customisation you do has an impact on Microsofts ability (not desire, our ability) to support the solution. This is the same regardless of whether the modification you are making is considered “supported” or “not supported”. The key thing for me is you should try to ensure that any changes you make are as “supportable” as possible, for example by creating a new site definition rather than modify the standard ones. This usually comes down to how easy it is for us, at Microsoft Support Services, to reproduce a problem. Some customisations make this only a little bit more difficult, but some, well they can make it altogether impossible! (think direct SQL writes)
Thanks Ryan for the Post, I think it contributes a great deal to the ongoing conversation about SharePoint supportability taking place in the Blogosphere.
Makes me think, aint blogs grand?