On Tue, 23 Jul 2013 16:05:34 -0500, Ed Gould wrote: > >Sigh... there is "installed" and then there is INSTALLED. No >application programmer would/should be granted access to update to >any system library if that is what you complaining about too bad, If >you are talking SMPE Again the smpe libraries are essentially keys. >Now they are OK for an auditor or management to READ them but NOT for >lowly programmers. If you want SMPE for the average joe programmer >again the answer should be NO. There are some things (albiet few >things) that application should not be using. > Elitism. SMP/E should be just a tool to be used with appropriate protection of resources. Until about 3 years ago, the fact was (believed to be) that with proper data set protection SMP/E was no more dangerous than any other tool. You seem to be asserting that use of SMP/E should be restricted to an elite cadre, but in your previous submission:
On Tue, 23 Jul 2013 15:14:10 -0500, Ed Gould wrote: > >... We had one person that work from home and she installed a >product and it utterly failed as she show horned it in rather than >following the install via smp/e (after all she worked from home cough >cough cough). > >Nobody could figure out how to implement it (nobody wanted to touch >it as it was installed haphazard. The product never got used and >several thousand dollars went down the drain. > Was this before or after the sea change of 3 years ago? In those happy days gone by, she would have needed no more permissions to use SMP/E than to perform the "shoehorn" installation. I don't know her job description. Would she nowadays be granted the extraordinary privileges required to use SMP/E? Was she applications or systems? -- gil ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
