> On Jul 12, 2017, at 5:33 AM, John Eells wrote:
>
>
> And no, the graphic on p. 35 has nothing to do with robots. I just thought
> it was a neat graphic that helped illustrate the modernization of a 25+ year
> old installation process.\
I guess I have been watching STNG
sed Installation (WasL Re: AW: Re: EAV volumes and
SYSRES)
Not sure what is being planned but is this an all or nothing proposal?
Meaning you either have to use it for installation or the order doesn't get
installed? I don't know if others here may agree with me, but I, and some
others in my shop, wo
BMC was very, very much on-board from the get-go in the design of the
installation process, so I would think that whatever internal knowledge BMC
had of how to make a good install process got incorporated into the z/OSMF
process.
Charles
Good point.
Since the term 'ISV' has already been
are
suppose to perform.
my 2 cents
Carmen
- Original Message -
From: "Barbara Nitz" <nitz-...@gmx.net>
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Sent: Wednesday, July 12, 2017 6:50:07 AM
Subject: Re: z/OSMF-Based Installation (WasL Re: AW: Re: EAV volumes and
SYSRES)
>But
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
> Behalf Of Turner Cheryl L
> Sent: 12 July, 2017 14:23
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: z/OSMF-Based Installation (WasL Re: AW: Re: EAV volumes and
> SYSRE
@listserv.ua.edu] On Behalf
Of John Eells
Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2017 7:36 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@listserv.ua.edu
Subject: z/OSMF-Based Installation (WasL Re: AW: Re: EAV volumes and SYSRES)
Peter Hunkeler wrote:
> Topic change due? Possibly more opinions if people understand it is about
> z/OSF now.
>
>But is it a valid data point? We use z/OSMF only insofar as we are forced to
>for IP configuration and upkeep. We did not use z/OSMF to install v2.2, and I
>don't know whether we'll use it to install v2.3. There is talk of it, but it
>seems to be largely motivated by the thought that we
Art Gutowski wrote:
At the last SHARE, the question was asked at the multivendor
installation-related
session about how many in the room were z/OSMF users. In the past, I've seen
those raising a hand to be perhaps 25% of a similarly-sized crowd, but in March
about 2/3 of those present raised
Edward Gould wrote:
Interesting but I am not convinced that this is any better than what is
currently available. It also looks (to me) complicated and one person seems to
have to be doing “it” from start to end, is that the case?
Slide 35(?) are you trying to show a robot can do this but not
On Tue, 11 Jul 2017 07:35:52 -0400, John Eells wrote:
>Everyone: IBM is headed toward using z/OSMF Software Management as the
>installer. Please go back to near the beginning of this thread with the
>old topic name to catch up on the discussion thus far.
>
>More on the SHARE
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU]
> On Behalf Of John Eells
> Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2017 4:29 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: EAV volumes and SYSRES
>
> Gibney, Dave wrote:
> > z/OSMF assumes access to zIIP.
> On Jul 11, 2017, at 6:35 AM, John Eells wrote:
>
> Peter Hunkeler wrote:
>> Topic change due? Possibly more opinions if people understand it is about
>> z/OSF now.
>>
>>
>
> Peter, good idea.
>
> Everyone: IBM is headed toward using z/OSMF Software Management as the
>
Peter Hunkeler wrote:
Topic change due? Possibly more opinions if people understand it is about z/OSF
now.
Peter, good idea.
Everyone: IBM is headed toward using z/OSMF Software Management as the
installer. Please go back to near the beginning of this thread with the
old topic name to
13 matches
Mail list logo