John Eells wrote: >>Yes, we absolutely do still consider requirements valuable, and we DO >>use them when prioritizing work for upcoming releases. Buy me a beer at >>SCIDS in Denver and I'll tell you what happened with this one.
Thanks John. It's good to know that the SHARE requirement has not gone the way of the punched card. Even when I was writing my comment, I knew that NOTHING is easy for IBM. I'm sure that somewhere in the IBM universe this simple enhancement request got bogged down under a mountain of managers, lawyers, accountants, or other bureaucrats. I put this in the same category as the request to expand the 100 byte PARM limit -- users want it, implementation should be easy, but it's not going to happen. Why don't you just come clean and admit that you lost the MVS source code in 1992! :-) Clark ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
