On Wed, 13 Sep 2006 09:35:40 -0400, David Cole <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>... >>> (c) So the maintenance job we provide does the following: >>> >>> RESTORE: This removes prior maintenance from the >>> TLIBs, restoring them to their initial installation >>> state. >>> >>> REJECT: This removes the prior maintenance data from >>> SMP/E's database. >>> >>> RECEIVE: This introduces the new maintenance file >>> into SMP/E's database. >>> >>> APPLY: This applies the new maintenance to z/XDC's >>>... >> Please don't encourage this misuse of SMP. > >Hi Arthur, > >I guess I have to take strong exception to your characterization of >my suggestion as a "misuse" of SMP/E. ... I agree with Arthur here. It souinds like your procedure just uses SMP as a driver for IEBCOPY. Yes, that's something SMP does, so I guess it's not a "misuse", but but it completely eliminates SMP's ability to coordinate maintenance (which is its only value, IM not so HO). If you are going to use that technique, why bother with SMP at all? If your product does not need the coordination of fixes, you don't need SMP. To someone trying to learn SMP, this technique is very misleading. To those already familiar with SMP this could look like a marketting gimick, just allowing you to say "We use SMP". Pat O'Keefe ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
