On Wed, 25 Apr 2012 19:24:57 -0400, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) wrote: >In <4f96b36c.3000...@acm.org>, on 04/24/2012 > at 09:06 AM, "Joel C. Ewing" <jcew...@acm.org> said: > >>SMP/E dialogs do not work that way. Users do not share the same >>variables directly, they share the same list of "named" maintenance >>projects > >Is that a new function? I don't recall ever seeing named projects in >the dialogs.
Joel is referring to is the "Run comment". > >>Yes, you can deduce most of the state information from the CSI, >>possibly with help from the SMP/E log datasets; but it takes much >>more work and adds unnecessary opportunity for human error. > >Isn't it the other way around? The state information in the ISPF >variables may be stale if you RECEIVE updated HOLDDATA, while the >state information in the CSI is current. The state information that is stored in SMPTABL is not the state of SYSMODs. It is the state of the Sysmod Management dialog. For example, someone could start a SYSMOD Management dialog process to install RSU maintenance and select the APPLY/ACCEPT path. It might take several iterations of APPLY CHECK, reading HOLDDATA, adding or excluding SYSMODs, etc. before being ready to do the APPLY. That might include receiving additional HOLDDATA or SYSMODs. If you take over a dialog that someone else started, you can you don't necessarily have to go through all of the iterations that they did. -- Tom Marchant ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
