Hi Ed, Regarding "Letting IBM off with variations is nonsense.", I choose to think of it as being pragmatic. I can complain all day about how IBM's reduction of staff is hurting the mainframe, but the fact is that they are doing it despite anything I might say or do. Believe me that putting people to work on implementing "/" and "*/" in each parmlib member is NOT going to make it into the line items for a new release with higher priority work and reduced staff size.
Before I wrote up the requirements, I did a thorough study of the Parmlib members and found that about half allow '*' in the first position. Because different departments work on each Parmlib member, I had to write up a separate requirement for each one, and it would have taken years (if ever) to get them all changed. Then Peter Relson, who wears many hats and is trusted by everyone in IBM, offered to do all the coding if he could implement the '*' version because, obviously, it's the least amount of coding (if a = '*' then bypass). I said that it would meet my requirements, the MVSE Requirements committee agreed, and he had it done a week later. If we had forced IBM to do it the "right way", it wouldn't be done today. At least now there is an option to put comments in the Parmlib members that didn't have them. And as my first email suggested, I think it would make a lot of sense for people to add a comment box at the top of every Parmlib member that includes not only an example of comments, but provides a place to put comments. You can save newbies a lot of trouble (and down time) in the future. I think this is just one of many compromises that we'll need to make with a reduced IBM staff, but I'd rather work within the system and get some things accomplished. (I could only wish our political parties could do the same.) ;-) All my best, Cheryl -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Edward Gould Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2016 3:25 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: Comments in SYS1.PARMLIB Cheryl: Thanks for all your work on this. However it occurs to me that IBM is still not living up to the spirit of the request. I would suggest that the “/*" and the “*/” standard (since day one mind you) IS the gold standard. Letting IBM off with variations is nonsense. The first “GROUP” who really went off the reservation (with documentation and other IBM standards) was the OMVS Group. Letting IBM set this kind of “standard” is dangerous IMO. More than one time I have had to make on the fly updates to Parmlib so that the IPL could be corrected and restarted loosing 30+ minutes (assuming I was present) in one case two hours. Just because of a finger check. This allowing IBM to change the rules for each member is IMO short sighted and will land more pressure down the road to standardize things… Bad decision on IBM’s part in both cases, IMO. Ed > On Aug 23, 2016, at 9:02 AM, Cheryl Watson <che...@watsonwalker.com> wrote: > > Hi all, > > It's true that not all Parmlib members support the same format, but > the Init & Tuning Guide has been updated to show which type of > comments are allowed in each member. > > In 2011, I created a dozen SHARE requirements to add comments to the > remaining Parmlib members that didn't support them. Peter Relson was > kind enough to come to our aid and implemented comments for the then > active Parmlib members. This excerpt comes from our Tuning Letter 2013 No. 3: > ======================================= > Comments > > Change documentation is very dear to my heart, so I have been upset > for years by the fact that you could not add comments to many of the > parmlib members. I got so frustrated that I wrote up SHARE > requirements for many of the members to either add or modify the ability to > add comments. > > Thanks to z/OS guru Peter Relson of IBM, who works with the SHARE MVSE > requirements committee, we now have an APAR, OA38328 (z/OS 1.12-1.13, > 17Apr2013, New Function - Parmlib Comment Support), that address many > of these requirements. The following parmlib members have been > modified to allow an asterisk in position 1 of a line to indicate that > the rest of the line is a comment: > > COMMNDxx - Commands to be issued at IPL GTFPARM (or the parmlib member > identified by the GTF procedure) - Parameters used by the Generalized > Trace Facility > IEAABD00 - Specifies data to be dumped to SYSABEND > IEACMD00 - IBM-supplied commands to be issued at IPL > IEADMP00 - Specifies data to be dumped to SYSUDUMP > IEADMR00 - Specifies data to be dumped to SYSMDUMP IEAPAKxx - Link > Pack Area (LPA) pack list IEASYSxx - System parameter list LPALSTxx - > Link Pack Area (LPA) library list VATLSTxx - Volume attribute list > > I just LOVE this APAR! Because you might start adding comments after > the PTF is applied, you should probably determine a standard method of > documentation that everyone can follow. This would normally include > the date and time, description of the change (including the reason for > the change), and the person making the change. You should also make a > note of any dependencies (i.e. a change in one parameter in this > parmlib requires a change in another parameter in another parmlib). > Figure 3 is an example of a "flower box" (as we used to call them) > that we would insert at the beginning of every parmlib member. (Note > - in Word, but not email, the right hand asterisks are in > line.) > > Figure 3 - Documenting a Parmlib Member > ****************************************************** > * Notes: > * > * If you change parameter xxx, then you * > * should make a corresponding change * > * in member xxxxxx. * > * * > ****************************************************** > * Change Log: * > * 2012/03/20, 10:30am - CLW - Changed xxxx * > * to xxxx to add PROGB1 suffix * > * 2012/03/27, 8am - CLW - Added xxxxx per * > * memo from xxxx dated 3/25/12 * > * * > ****************************************************** > > Unfortunately, you can't use the same comment box in all parmlib > members, because comments aren't always indicated in the same way. The > IEASYMxx member only allows comments when enclosed within the bounds > of a /* and an */; TSOKEY00 only allows comments at the end of all > parameters; and members IGDSMSxx, IPCSPRxx, and IVTPRM00 don't allow any > comments. > > RECOMMENDATION: Apply the PTF and start adding comments to these > long-neglected parmlib members. > ================================================= > > I hope this help, > Cheryl > > Cheryl Watson > Watson & Walker, Inc. > www.watsonwalker.com > > > -----Original Message----- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] > On Behalf Of Feller, Paul > Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2016 9:43 AM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: Re: Comments in SYS1.PARMLIB > > I thought there was a push by IBM to allow comments in all members. I > thought the last few members that could not have comments now allow > comments. As an example I know the COMMNDxx member did not allow > comments, but now it does. I know the way you put in comments does > vary from member to member. > > Thanks.. > > Paul Feller > AGT Mainframe Technical Support > > -----Original Message----- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] > On Behalf Of Vernooij, Kees (ITOPT1) - KLM > Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2016 08:26 > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: Re: Comments in SYS1.PARMLIB > > This is because there is no SYS1.PARMLIB owner and interpreter. Each > member has its own owner with its own syntax rules and syntax > interpreter. I presume it is (also here) impossible to have all the > labs agree on one set of rules. > > Kees. > > -----Original Message----- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] > On Behalf Of Dyck, Lionel B. (TRA) > Sent: 23 August, 2016 15:13 > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: Re: Comments in SYS1.PARMLIB > > Sadly no > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > ---- > Lionel B. Dyck (TRA Contractor) > Mainframe Systems Programmer > Enterprise Infrastructure Support (Station 200) (005OP6.3.10) VA OI&T > Service Delivery & Engineering > > -----Original Message----- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] > On Behalf Of Richards, Robert B. > Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2016 8:11 AM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: [EXTERNAL] Comments in SYS1.PARMLIB > > This has probably been asked before, but a quick search of the > archives did not yield the results I was looking for. > > Do all members of SYS1.PARMLIB now support /* */ commenting? > > z/OS' 2.1 and 2.2 installed. > > Bob > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send > email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send > email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > ******************************************************** > For information, services and offers, please visit our web site: > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.klm.com&d=DQIF > Ag&c=9 > g4MJkl2VjLjS6R4ei18BA&r=eUhu3PeeWy6RTndlJVKembFjFsvwCa8eeU_gm45NyOc&m= > jxny6Y > sC6RioMY8630Lu5CRHRmeQTyBBluARUP3_NGI&s=LHCFuRbZpRcIsVd7UvpDSerOhMKCx2 > pvUh9G 1aPoOvE&e= . This e-mail and any attachment may contain > confidential and privileged material intended for the addressee only. > If you are not the addressee, you are notified that no part of the > e-mail or any attachment may be disclosed, copied or distributed, and > that any other action related to this e-mail or attachment is strictly > prohibited, and may be unlawful. If you have received this e-mail by > error, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail, and > delete this message. > > Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij NV (KLM), its subsidiaries and/or > its employees shall not be liable for the incorrect or incomplete > transmission of this e-mail or any attachments, nor responsible for any delay > in receipt. > > Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij N.V. (also known as KLM Royal > Dutch > Airlines) is registered in Amstelveen, The Netherlands, with > registered number 33014286 > ******************************************************** > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send > email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send > email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > (null) > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send > email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN (null) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
