On Fri, 5 Sep 2008 21:20:13 -0500, Kenneth E Tomiak wrote: >All you need to do is know how to present what you find. I reported >GIMASAMP returns incorrect output as a SEV(4). Don't make a big deal out of >a sample not working and IBM will listen. Level 2 tested the code with and >without my corrections and understood it really is broken and I was not >looking to sneak in an enhancement. They contacted the developers who >were more than willing to listen and I was asked did I want an APAR or could it >be fixed in the next release. It has likely been broken since the day it was >released so I was reasonable and closed the ETR with the understanding it will >be fixed in the next release. Since DB2 9 is current, it might be a few years >before the sample is fixed. But then it was broken for so long, I can wait. I >would think no one else brought it IBM's attention so how urgent is it, really! > SMP/E is good that way. I once reported a problem SEV4. They supplied a PTF within 3 weeks. It was a message inconsistency, and I had expected them to modify the message, which I would have found satisfactory. In fact, they changed the code to recover from a plausible user error.
>I also submit requests to fix documentation and get responses. Submitting >requests following the proper procedure does work. Low priority changes might >take a few months, but IBM does listen and act. They just have to prioritize >what they can get done with the resources they have. And I always consider >if it has been broken for years then it can get fixed in the next release. > My experience also with SMP/E. In contrast to JCL and TSO, which will call just about anything WAD and change the documentation. -- gil ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
