Ken Tomiak said > <<>>Or the system programmer has to justify the behaviour to an auditor and > the vendor did not provide an easily understood explanation of why SUB=MSTR or > an IEFSSNxx entry is required.
That pretty much makes my point. If they don't understand what either of those things mean, then any number of pages explaining why it's necessary are going to be essentially worthless. Ask me how I know :-( I also find it depressingly ironic that customers (righteously) require us to play by the rules of the architecture and operating system and then go all whiny and crybaby on us when doing the aforementioned "right thing" means they have to make a one line change in a parmlib member. You would think we were asking them to consign first born children into slavery. And being treated like a giant doofus who's just aching to knock down western civilization along the way just puts frosting on the cake. My tolerance for calm rational exposition goes downhill very quickly in those situations. And having done that same job myself a good many years earlier, I have a lot of trouble mustering any sympathy for their position. I tend to believe that having the keys to the family Buick ought to signify the holder is at least knowledgeable enough to get the key in the thing and be able to back it out the driveway without having the owner's manual and a "Buick Controls for Dummies" book open on the front seat. Draw any analogy you want to other systems programmers (or auditors) that you have known over the years. Of course none of this august body would ever fall into that group though right? CC ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
