Ed, When I was last on a long-term consultancy, by example, I tried to encourage a crude approach to documenting responsibility - and purpose - in a common library by creating a member $$$INDEX. Each line in this member started with the name of each member I added - or had been added by someone I worked with and I was changing - to be followed by my name and a brief explanation of why it was there. (The "$" signs at the beginning of the name ensured that the member appeared first in the member list of course.) This was a technique I used to use simply to keep track of my own work with my test/education systems since I was very likely to forget work done years before. The 8-character member name was never much help as documentation. I even had <higher-level-qualifier>.$$$INDEX data sets in which I listed my data sets with explanations.
I expect if you made this a rule and devised some code to highlight any undocumented member at the end of each day/week, you might have a management tool to help keep track of who did what and why especially when the "who" was unavoidably detained incommunicado for whatever reason. Writing this up reminds me that the user name associated with members was some gibberish that needed a lookup tool to translate to a person's name. This must have been why putting the person's name in the description record seemed like a good idea. Maybe there are some products out there which claim to help with a process such as this but there's no avoiding the necessary discipline of remembering to "expand" the 8 characters to something which describes why the member is there and what it does - and that's assuming there's even a choice of member name. There's a similar issue regarding a single member which can have many people building it up and making changes but I've wittered on enough for now ... Chris Mason ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ed Gould" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibm-main To: <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, 16 February, 2006 9:09 PM Subject: Re: Redirecting Software Functionality > The other issue that I have seen in this that the copies of modules > show up in a common library. It is close to impossible to pinpoint > who put them there... Looking through SMF shows hundreds of updates > and it gets worse as you don't know *WHEN* it happened. Unless you > monitor the library on a daily basis it might be years before you run > into the issue. If anyone knows of a way to stop it I would be happy > to listen. > > Ed ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
