We had installed DF/EF and converted our main production catalog to an ICF catalog right before IBM pulled it from the market (if I remember correctly). Thankfully the converted catalog never experienced any problems.
Mark Jacobs Sent from ProtonMail, Swiss-based encrypted email. GPG Public Key - https://api.protonmail.ch/pks/lookup?op=get&[email protected] ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ On Saturday, February 29, 2020 9:40 PM, Seymour J Metz <[email protected]> wrote: > I don't recall any problems with DFP, but I counted myself blessed that I > never installed DF/EF. > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz > http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 > > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [[email protected]] on behalf of > Clark Morris [[email protected]] > Sent: Friday, February 28, 2020 7:09 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: DF/EF andd DFP the IBM predecessor was Re: OT Boeing flight software > > [Default] On 28 Feb 2020 07:24:20 -0800, in bit.listserv.ibm-main > [email protected] (scott Ford) wrote: > > > Mike, > > Reminds me of this whole Agile process that’s being used. Incomplete > > thinking, not like a lot of old timer Sysprogs, who had to think about , > > installation, testing, implementation in production, impact on users and > > backup. > > DF/EF comes to mind and Jamie Yates of IBM describing a situation of > clients calling with a SEV 1 problem when they didn't have one because > they would by the time they got a call back. After installing DFP, my > feeling at the time that DFP stood for Damn Fragile Product, a > sentiment at least some of my compatriots at SHARE agreed with. The > PE chains were something else. > > Clark Morris > > > Boeing sounds piecemeal .. > > Scott > > On Fri, Feb 28, 2020 at 6:42 AM Ray Pearce [email protected] wrote: > > > > > Orlando Sentinel says: > > > Unfortunately, our website is currently unavailable in most European > > > countries. We are engaged on the issue and committed to looking at options > > > that support our full range of digital offerings to the EU market. We > > > continue to identify technical compliance solutions that will provide all > > > readers with our award-winning journalism. > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]] On > > > Behalf Of Mike Schwab > > > Sent: 28 February 2020 02:19 > > > To: [email protected] > > > Subject: OT Boeing flight software > > > https://www.orlandosentinel.com/space/os-bz-boeing-safety-commercial-crew-20200226-bgvthodnjzgmlc36hsxcaopahu-story.html > > > Boeing didn’t perform full end-to-end test of its astronaut capsule > > > before troubled mission, ‘surprising’ NASA safety panel. > > > Critically, the panel learned early this month that Boeing did not > > > perform a full, end-to-end integrated test of Starliner in a Systems > > > Integration Lab with ULA’s Atlas V rocket. The test typically shows > > > how all the software systems during each component of the mission > > > would have responded with each other through every maneuver — and it > > > could potentially have caught the issues Boeing later experienced in > > > the mission. > > > “It’s pretty exhaustive. You gotta do that,” said Christopher Saindon, > > > a former member who ended his tenure on the panel in mid-February. > > > “That was somewhat surprising to us on the panel. There were certainly > > > gaps in the test protocol.” > > > It was software that ultimately did fail Boeing when it flew Starliner > > > on a Dec. 20 mission intended to dock with the International Space > > > Station. The capsule’s internal clock was 11 hours ahead, causing it > > > to miss critical maneuvers and fly into the incorrect orbit. Then, > > > communication issues potentially caused by cell towers in the area > > > blocked Boeing from sending a command to rectify the orbit. Starliner, > > > the company determined, wasn’t going to be able to reach the space > > > station. > > > But in the process of bringing it back down and re-checking its > > > software, the company caught yet another issue that could have caused > > > Starliner to collide with its service module when the two separated > > > prior to the capsule’s return to Earth. Teams were able to correct the > > > issue before to the capsule’s return on Dec. 22, but the multitude of > > > problems have led NASA to call for a full re-verification of Boeing’s > > > software — a process that will take analyzing about a million lines of > > > code. > > > Software issues are also plaguing another arm of Boeing, which is > > > dealing with the fall out of problems with its 737 Max airplanes that > > > led to the deaths of 346 people and has grounded the planes. > > > -- > > > Mike A Schwab, Springfield IL USA > > > Where do Forest Rangers go to get away from it all? > > > > > > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > > > send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > > -- > > > This e-mail message has been scanned and cleared by Google Message > > > Security > > > and the UNICOM Global security systems. This message is for the named > > > person's use only. If you receive this message in error, please delete it > > > and notify the sender. > > > > > > 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 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
