As a pure customer, I also prefer SMPE install/maint for exactly the reason Charles's customer gave. No matter how cleverly designed, every non-SMPE process is a one-off dogie that has to be mastered on its own with little or no transfer to other products. SMPE, for better or worse, is a standard process that can be handed off from one person to another with minimal learning curve. In reality, that 'other person' is often your future self. ;-)
. . . J.O.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] -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Charles Mills Sent: Friday, September 11, 2015 8:27 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: SMP/E Help > I assume one of the reasons you are venturing down this road is not so > much because you (or your customers) think the initial install of your > software in SMP/E format is very exciting, but rather because of the prospect > of follow-on service in PTF format. I can't speak for the OP but I can speak to our own recent expedition into the wonderful world of building for SMP/E. No, the motivation had nothing to do with PTFs. We have a pretty simple product and for us, so far at least, for better or worse every fix consists of either (1) a change to configuration files in character form, so the change can be e-mailed as a simple text file or snippet with some edit instructions; or (2) an entire new build just like a new installation but with a JCL process that does not clobber existing customer parms. No, the motivation was customer requests. I said to a customer sysprog "I thought our IEBCOPY install was pretty good." He said "it's great, and SMP/E is a pain in the [butt], but it's a consistent pain in the [butt]. Every vendor's IEBCOPY install is unique." Customers -- especially the largest customers -- don't IMHO by-and-large love SMP/E, but they know it and live and breathe it, and they want vendor products delivered that way. Charles -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Kurt Quackenbush Sent: Friday, September 11, 2015 8:09 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: SMP/E Help > I need some help with SMP/E. I need to convert our software to use > SMP/E. I am not a SMP/E heavy. I have the following; > > 1. Linklib > 2. Proclib > 3. Parmlib > 4. JCLLIB ( for install ) , this can be removed , because SMP/E will > do it 5. Rexx Clistlib Further thoughts on the process of packaging your software in SYSMOD format: I assume one of the reasons you are venturing down this road is not so much because you (or your customers) think the initial install of your software in SMP/E format is very exciting, but rather because of the prospect of follow-on service in PTF format. Therefore, you must consider how you intend to supply parts/files later in PTFs before you create your initial FUNCTION SYSMOD. In my opinion, most parts/files ("elements" in SMP/E terminology) are very simple to package and install. Using your example, procs, parmlib members, sample JCL, execs, are all very simple to manage, package, and install, because they are just members of a partitioned data set that are copied and replaced by SMP/E. It is modules and load modules that cause the most grief. Traditional z/OS software is SMP/E packaged using MOD elements to describe modules that get link edited during the APPLY to create load modules (load modules or program objects). It is link edit steps in JCLIN that tells SMP/E how to put the MODs together to create these load modules. This is all a very well grooved path, but, JCLIN and MODs can be a great pain, and I'd say the cause of most grief for packagers and installers. You can greatly simplify you and your customers' efforts if you can avoid MODs and JCLIN altogether. That is, it is far simpler to package complete load modules using PROGRAM elements rather than as individual MODs with JCLIN. PROGRAM elements treat load modules as simple members of a partitioned data set that can be copied and replaced. No JCLIN is necessary and no link edit processing is performed by SMP/E. To determine if you can successfully use PROGRAM elements you have to consider the contents of your load modules and how they are built. Do your load modules include any parts not supplied by you? For example, callable services from CSSLIB or SCEELKED? Modules from subsystems or other products, like SDSNLOAD or ISPLLIB? Side decks (IMPORT statements) to resolve DLL references? If so, then you may want to, or need to, package individual modules as MODs and supply JCLIN to define your load modules. Shucks. However, if your load modules are rather simple and include only modules that you own, then you should consider using PROGRAM elements in your SYSMOD packaging for your initial FUNCTION and subsequent PTFs. Kurt Quackenbush -- IBM, SMP/E Development ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
