Nicely worded, Ed. Maybe I'm not imagining things when I believe IBM is more interested in closing open problem records than in solving the underlying problems. It didn't used to be this way. Having posted this publicly, can I assume you don't mind if I use the same response?
>Are you sure you guys work for IBM? You put out a PTF that breaks >existing specifications, you have a workaround that you don't document >because it's only a temporary fix, and you're ready to close this PMR >and move on? At this point, the IBM I know would be adding a ++HOLD DOC >or ++HOLD ACTION to the PTF or marking the fix as PE until the new fix >can be delivered. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
