It is very disturbing to see someone use an inflammatory representation such as the initial subject of this thread when that is very much *not* what the SOD said.
Maybe in practice stabilization will result in some JES3 users choosing to move (perhaps because they need new function that would become available only in JES2), but IBM is not dropping JES3, nor did the statement of direction say or imply anything about doing so. That's like saying just because we might have stabilized some system service that you must stop using it. That too would be a faulty conclusion. Regardless, input such as what Cheryl W refers to is important. (John Eells would probably have stated the above in a cleaner way; apologies to him.) Peter Relson z/OS Core Technology Design ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
