Sorry for reaching back to an older posting in this thread. I did not see this question handled. I worked with Ed at that same institution, the late great Security Pacific Bank. While it's true that (undoubtedly) no module in the widely shared production load library was marked AC(1), the library itself was APF authorized because some modules were called out of CPCS, IBM's check processing product that itself ran authorized.
So the question: if a program is running in an APF environment but is not itself marked AC(1), do the PARMDD considerations apply? . . JO.Skip Robinson Southern California Edison Company Electric Dragon Team Paddler SHARE MVS Program Co-Manager 626-302-7535 Office 323-715-0595 Mobile [email protected] From: Ed Jaffe <[email protected]> To: [email protected], Date: 03/29/2013 07:28 AM Subject: Re: 32760? (was: PARMDD?) Sent by: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <[email protected]> On 3/29/2013 6:46 AM, Vernooij, CP - SPLXM wrote: > Code has to be written to use PARMDD and will therefore not crash production applications unexpectedly. When I worked for a large bank, none of our production batch applications were APF authorized. However, changes to production JCL went through the same rigorous system and regression testing process that our application programs did. Therefore, I suppose one _could_ validly include production JCL specifications in one's definition of "code". But, I view this as a loose interpretation... -- Edward E Jaffe Phoenix Software International, Inc 831 Parkview Drive North El Segundo, CA 90245 http://www.phoenixsoftware.com/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
