There seems to be a lot of variability in who finds what intuitive. I recall a discussion about "for(;;;)", a construction in a language I hate, being hard, and I thought that it was perfectly clear. Other things that some found obvious seemed strange to me.
-- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 ________________________________________ From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [[email protected]] on behalf of Roberto Halais [[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2023 7:52 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: z/OSMF Panel options are not intuitive. On Wed, May 31, 2023 at 7:42 AM Seymour J Metz <[email protected]> wrote: > TINW. > > Perhaps some are just resistant to change, but even those (hypothetical) > people may have valid objections, e.g., > > Performance > > Inadequate testing against a wide variety of installations > > Inadequate documentation and training > > Inadequate transition tools > > Inadequate transition period > > > -- > Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz > http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 > > ________________________________________ > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [[email protected]] on behalf > of VER Z038 [[email protected]] > Sent: Tuesday, May 30, 2023 8:14 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: z/OSMF > > Why so much hate for z/OSMF? We sound like a bunch of grumpy old boomers > resistant to change. 🙂 > > I always found ServerPac clunky and unnecessarily complicated. Longing for > that is not a hill I would choose to die on. 🙂 > > I have been supporting a 4 LPAR organisation since 2018 using z/OSMF > Software Management and I think it's OK. It has its quirks but so does > anything. It suits how I like to work. > > I like having an automated inventory of what I deployed where and when. I > also like being able to model a new deployment on an old one so the bulk of > definitions do not need to happen from scratch. I also like how the > integrated workflow for a new software level forces you to eyeball and > action anything that is needed for the upgrade. > > Using z/OSMF Software Management does not mean you have to turn your brain > off. You can still augment or change how things happen if you need to. Jobs > are generated that you can look at before submission. Job output is > captured so you can look at it after it executes. > > In my 4 LPAR environment, when building a new SYSRES, I only use z/OSMF to > construct the first system. After that I choose to ADRDSSU full dump > restore it the other 3 LPARs because I think redoing the z/OSMF work is > simply too tedious to be worth doing over and over. But that is OK. I am > sure IBM will get there eventually fixing things that need fixing. That has > been happening consistently throughout the life of z/OSMF from the early > days where simply starting it would completely paralyse your system. > > Neil. > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > -- Politics: Poli (many) - tics (blood sucking parasites) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
