Barry, We NEVER would have a r11.0 PTF have a PRE of a r11.5 PTF. When we supported both r11.0 and r11.5 (remember, r11.0 is no longer officially supported), we always published both a r11.0 version and a r11.5 version with different PRE statements.
Russell Witt CA-1 Level-2 Support Manager -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Schwarz, Barry A Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2007 5:04 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: RMM to CA-1 or CA-1 to RMM The only problem I have had with CA-1 is CA's insistence on keeping the same FMID when changing versions. As a result, they have V11.0 PTFs (which I want to install) that PRE V11.5 PTFs (which I'm not yet ready to install). -----Original Message----- From: John Benik [mailto:snip] Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2007 1:19 PM To: [email protected] Subject: RMM to CA-1 or CA-1 to RMM Well, it seems we have two directions we can go with our tape management system. We have some systems that run CA-1 and some that run RMM. At first we stated that we wanted to go to CA-1. This seems to be what the majority of people use. My personnel opinion I like CA-1 much better, I would like to get some opinions on what people think is the best way to go. I know, (because I've been there), most system programmers will choose RMM... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
