Re: UR1 vs FIN

2008-06-23 Thread Ted MacNEIL
The APAR closing codes are: You forgot: WAD Working As Designed And (humour?): BAD Broken As Designed FN Fixed Never - Too busy driving to stop for gas! -- For

Re: UR1 vs FIN

2008-06-23 Thread John P. Baker
I prefer: BAC Broken As Coded John P. Baker -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ted MacNEIL Sent: Monday, June 23, 2008 8:06 PM To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU Subject: Re: UR1 vs FIN The APAR closing codes

Re: UR1 vs FIN

2008-06-17 Thread Edward Jaffe
Roger Bolan wrote: UR1 is used for changes that are regarded as new function or some kind of improvement or enhancement that was not technically a programming error (close code PER) because the program was implementing what the programming specification had said it should do. It also means

Re: UR1 vs FIN

2008-06-16 Thread Brian Peterson
From ServiceLink User's Guide Document Number SH52-0300-10 September 1996, as found in VM IBMLink: Appendix B.1 APAR Closing Codes The APAR closing codes are: ADM A

Re: UR1 vs FIN

2008-06-16 Thread Pinnacle
- Original Message - From: Edward Jaffe [EMAIL PROTECTED] Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibm-main Sent: Monday, June 16, 2008 11:36 AM Subject: UR1 vs FIN I'm being offered UR1 closure for an APAR. The description sounds just like FIN closure. Is there a difference? Ed, It's better

Re: UR1 vs FIN

2008-06-16 Thread Edward Jaffe
Brian Peterson wrote: FIN Fixed in next release UR1 Programming error in the reported release; the problem has been corrected in a release not yet available from distribution Sounds like UR1 means something to the effect that the problem has actually been fixed in an announced

Re: UR1 vs FIN

2008-06-16 Thread Roger Bolan
In my experience, the difference is normally this: UR1 is used for changes that are regarded as new function or some kind of improvement or enhancement that was not technically a programming error (close code PER) because the program was implementing what the programming specification had said

Re: UR1 vs FIN

2008-06-16 Thread Robert Wright
Roger Bolan wrote: FIN means fixed in next, but this does not absolutely guarantee that there will be a next release. That's why you might have heard it as fixed IF next. It's generally used for certain kinds of changes that are only allowed to happen on a release boundary (like a

Re: UR1 vs FIN

2008-06-16 Thread Roger Bolan
Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU To IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU cc Subject Re: UR1 vs FIN Roger Bolan wrote: FIN means fixed in next, but this does not absolutely guarantee that there will be a next release. That's why you might have heard it as fixed IF next. It's

Re: UR1 vs FIN

2008-06-16 Thread Paul Gilmartin
On Mon, 16 Jun 2008 14:24:08 -0400, Robert Wright wrote: OA25428, for example, let current IPCS developers know that a developer 14 years ago made a data entry field on one panel two characters too narrow to accept the widest item that can properly be entered there. Hopefully, a lot of these