Re: GMail vs. COBOL
On Sat, Aug 20, 2016 at 05:27:37PM -0500, Paul Gilmartin wrote: > On Sat, 20 Aug 2016 19:07:20 +0200, Tomasz Rola wrote: > > > >I could have written that poor MUAs lead to respondends being unable > >to trim their emails to manageable size ... > > > I've heard of this misbehavior but never suffered it. I believe I suffer it on a daily basis. You too, probably. There are MUAs who will not conform to standards, and the number of people sending from their smartphones is growing too - I think it is hard to trim text using one's finger or a mouse, and it is hard to do serious editing or writing without help given by decent editor (and even small effort could be helped and it adds up the more often one writes). So I guess that users of such platforms suffer more than I - I would, if I had to use them for writing. However, I have very limited experience - so maybe they do not suffer as much as I imagine. Given I am only reading those emails, this gives me just an itch... about two or three hundred times a month (I am avid mailing lists subscriber so I believe the number to be literal rather than a metaphore). As of now I am going throu various webpages to see how I can help myself - modular technology to the rescue. > I assumed it was by design for integrity, preventing misquotation or > alteration of context or denial of previous statements. As of integrity, deniability etc, I guess people have been writing emails for about 50 years, give or take a decade, so perhaps something could be learned from the past. Or maybe not. Anyway, the digitally signed _unedited_ copy could be used as a proof who wrote what, when, maybe even where (some tweaks to existing solutions could be required for all this, albeit I am not sure about jurisdiction where such proof could serve in a court). Thus manipulating someone else's words would make no sense as long as she could serve such a signed copy. The archive could be a reliable third party to serve one. Alas, archives come up and down, and personal computers can be broken into. I admit I have not studied this subject at all. However, I do not think that leaving full copy in response is going to solve such problem better, or solve it at all. Or that anybody choose to make program do so because of such noble intention. -- Regards, Tomasz Rola -- ** A C programmer asked whether computer had Buddha's nature. ** ** As the answer, master did "rm -rif" on the programmer's home** ** directory. And then the C programmer became enlightened... ** ** ** ** Tomasz Rola mailto:tomasz_r...@bigfoot.com ** -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
BPXAS sysout class
Is there any way for me to get a bit bucket sysout class for BPXAS? My STCCLASS parm in JES2 is set to a regular output class and it looks like BPXAS uses that. I need something that will definitely work, since change BPXAS can put you in the pain cave. Regards, Tom Conley -- -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: GMail vs. COBOL
On Sat, 20 Aug 2016 19:07:20 +0200, Tomasz Rola wrote: > >I could have written that poor MUAs lead to respondends being unable >to trim their emails to manageable size ... > I've heard of this misbehavior but never suffered it. I assumed it was by design for integrity, preventing misquotation or alteration of context or denial of previous statements. But that's what archives are for, as Oliver North and Hillary Clinton learned. -- gil -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Survey question: what do you specify for HVCOMMON?
Upped ours to 200Gb, after the tenth DB2v10 subsystem on one of our Dev LPARs refused to start up. Whilst on the subject of HVCOMMON, we also have turned off TRACKDIRLOAD (in PROGxx) after seeing measurable growth in HVCOMMON usage after z/OS2.1 upgrade, the connection between the two only being clarified after a PMR conversation. On 19 August 2016 at 19:28, Feller, Paul wrote: > We currently have HVCOMMON set to 132G. We had to do this for DB2. When > DB2 starts up it looks to see how much high common is defined. > > Thanks.. > > Paul Feller > AGT Mainframe Technical Support > > -Original Message- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On > Behalf Of Charles Mills > Sent: Friday, August 19, 2016 11:28 > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: Survey question: what do you specify for HVCOMMON? > > What do you specify for HVCOMMON= in IEASYSxx? > > Are you letting it default to 64GB? > > Do you have applications using above-the-bar common? How much? > > Thanks, > > Charles > > -- > 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 IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: GMail vs. COBOL
On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 10:22:09PM -0400, Phil Smith III wrote: > What the top-posting vs. bottom-posting folks don't seem to recognize is > that both have their uses. Maybe. But choosing just one option is very limiting, like claiming that talking about oneself has its merits and talking about others has its merits - where is the vast sea of other possibilities? > In a business conversation, a thread may go thru 20 exchanges, and then > someone new gets added. That person is going to be completely lost without > the history to follow up on, and the existing respondents aren't going to > appreciate trying to catch them up. Interesting scenario. You probably are right with this one. [...] > So.let's not restart this war, eh? It'll never be solved anyway. But if > you're going to bottom-post, you really do need to trim. Paging through > multiple screens to read a one-line response is just irritating. I do not want to (re)start any war but I feel an urge to share an opinion, which is, I think a problem with top-bottom is more related to introduction of poor mailing applications. I cannot remember when in my life I had to "page down" to find one line response (on the bottom, I presume) because when I want to go there, I press "End" on my keyboard. It is that easy. I could have written that poor MUAs lead to respondends being unable to trim their emails to manageable size (do they even have keyboards, nowadays?), then eventually complaining about poor experience with email (but not so much about poor apps), then perhaps murmuring about "mail going to be dead" (because, with such a poor experience, what else could happen) and so on. But, life is short and if the rest of the world wants to shoot itself in the knee, why not. First, it is their knee. Then, they might find it pleasurable. And besides, someone could have thought I wanted to start a flame, while I have better things to do :-) . -- Regards, Tomasz Rola -- ** A C programmer asked whether computer had Buddha's nature. ** ** As the answer, master did "rm -rif" on the programmer's home** ** directory. And then the C programmer became enlightened... ** ** ** ** Tomasz Rola mailto:tomasz_r...@bigfoot.com ** -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
