Unfortunately and fortunately I've had the opportunity to work in many different shops, the phrase 'almost all shops use SYS3' is just B.S.
It all comes down to who started or documented the standards for that company or site, I've worked for companies that added a site ID to a HLQ, the standards were company wide, some sites had rules that OEM or vendor products were SYSP1.vender.product.libtype, and when multiple systems joined a sysplex SYS8 was used for sysplex datasets, so the rule is more a standard for the site or company. some very strange and don't make much sense, like the outsourcing company I worked for tried to force OEM* to the HLQ for program products, when OTHER standards were already in place in a 16 system sysplex with multiple customers, try forcing a long standing customer to accept that change :( same standards are being used for the Unix directory structure, everyone has an opinion on how it should be designed and they're no right or wrong way as long as everyone adheres to the standards. my 2 cents Carmen ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tony Thigpen" <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2017 9:18:05 PM Subject: SYS3 datasets We have a staff z/OS systems programmer who claims that: "Almost all shops use the SYS3. HLQ to indicate third party software." So new software installs *have* to follow that "rule". (Past installs did not follow such a rule.) I am thinking that this "rule" is really just *his* rule. Opinions? How many other sites follow such a rule? -- Tony Thigpen ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
