Loading
search-img

PrateekSri asked a question.

August 2, 2019 at 7:00 AM
Visual Studio Compliance
Why does SLM exclude unassigned licenses from compliance calculations ? I have 835 available licenses of Visual Studio 2017 Professional Subscription. Out of these 167 are unassigned. Shouldn't I have +167 compliance for this application ? Rather, Snow is making this application compliant by negating 167 licenses. The break of licenses is visible below (in screenshot):
  • 7 answers
  • 77 views

  • PrateekSri

    Both, Metric and Assignment type is 'User' & I haven't assigned any license yet.

    • SamuelBaughan

      Have you been displaying that info during the compliance calculation by coincidence? When the compliance calculation is running, usually all compliance figures go down to 0.

  • SamuelBaughan

    I just checked our environment and we have the same behaviour. It calculates the compliance as: Compliance = Coverage - Requirement But your coverage only takes into account what has been assigned, an unassigned license does not cover anything.

    • PrateekSri

      , I am getting this info from License Compliance Summary Report and at individual application level (both). I believe this answers my query. But If licenses are unassigned, means that they are extra licenses. Shouldn't I have '+' compliance here, rather than Zero. Just curious to know.

      • SamuelBaughan

        I agree with you, it would make sense for the compliance to take into account unassigned licenses. I assume this is a design decision from Snow. Probably there are good reasons for this design. One reason I see is that, according to some (most?) EULAs, it is implicit in the rules that the license needs to be " assigned " to the device/user. There are parameters and use rights that depend on the license assignment date (e.g. license mobility is affected by the assignment date for Microsoft licenses) ... This in itself is a good reason to compare the License Requirement to the Coverage rather that the quantity of available licenses. So Snow's design appears to be more in line with common license use terms as defined by companies.
        Expand Post

        • Shaz_Berry

          Hi and ‌, I do not agree with how Snow presents User licenses.  I think it is unnecessarily confusing for clients and requires SAM Consultants to click through to uncover the expected quantities. There is an idea put up by Linda Te Maipi   that will demystify and increase user and stakeholder satisfaction. Please vote up.  Ideas are only promoted if votes meet a threshold.  Unfortunately, unless you have 100's of people that follow you or you can reach an audience rather than them 'stumbling' on the idea it is difficult to get the votes to push the idea along.  Please pass onto your colleagues and followers if you agree.   Have a lovely Christmas! Kind Regards Sharron
          Expand Post

Related  Product Forums


                     â†’ Flexera One



                      â†’ Snow Atlas



                      â†’ FlexNet Manager



                      â†’ Snow License Manager



                       â†’ App Broker


       Need help finding an answer?


        Ask a Question →


+1.800.374.4353
CONTACT SALES SUPPORT HUB FLEXERA REVENERA
© 2026 Flexera. All rights reserved.
Privacy policy Terms and conditions Revenera Community Help
Loading
Visual Studio Compliance