Application programmers should be able to use SMP/E.  They just should
never be updating the system zones and libraries.  As an application
developer I have for years maintained my own "sandbox" CSI with my own
global, target and dlib zones.   I can do whatever I want in there with my
own zones and my own libraries without affecting the system or anybody else
on it.  I can test the installation of products, ++APARS, and PTFs and
recreate the scenarios of customers who get themselves into trouble.  It
has been invaluable.

--Roger


On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 3:05 PM, Ed Gould <[email protected]> wrote:

> Paul,
>
> 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.
>
> Ed
>
>
>
> On Jul 23, 2013, at 10:03 AM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
>
>  On 2013-07-23, at 08:53, Skip Robinson wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> I understand the appeal of the quick-and-dirty download-and-go approach,
>>> particularly for a consultant brought to town for a product install. It's
>>> fast, it's tidy, and it's over before the smoke clears. Then bye-bye to
>>> Ms. C, who moves on to the next town in dire need of a competent sheriff.
>>> But life goes on in each town. Next month or next year, some fix or
>>> enhancement is required. Who will do that and how? Who will know--or
>>> remember--exactly what state the product was left in after the last
>>> dust-up?
>>>
>>>  And if Ms. C were to oblige the customer and perform an installation
>> with SMP/E, she'd have to be granted the special privileges now
>> needed for SMP/E, over and above the authority to modify the data
>> sets actually needed for the product.  Will auditors be entirely
>> happy with that?
>>
>> Grrr.  I suppose Ms. C can back-seat drive for a member of the
>> systems staff with suitable privileges.
>>
>> -- gil
>>
>> ------------------------------**------------------------------**
>> ----------
>> 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
>

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Reply via email to