On Thu, 17 Feb 1994 12:08:23 -0500 Carl Forde said:
>On Thu, 17 Feb 1994 10:33:28 EST Martha McConaghy <[email protected]>, wrote:
>
>-- discussion of experience with current ADSM support implementation
>
>
>>I am concerned, however, that there are obvious flaws in this process which
>>IBM needs to address. I realize the product is very young and that we should
>
>In early December I opened a PMR with IBM complaining about the current
>method of delivering fixes and level-sets. The latest update is that
>there is work going on to make ADSM service look identical to what we
>have for other VM and MVS products (almost a direct quote). No ETA on
>this yet but I'm hopeful.
>
>It seems that the ADSM developers are listening to their customers. Got
>to like that.
I believe it is true that the ADSM developers are listening to their
customers. They still have enough hide left to maintain their presence
on this conference. I hope that they continue to do so.
I do not find that their method of delivering fixes is that much
different then many other IBM products. This is not to say that I
enjoy the current methods.
They now release fixes in ses or in replacement part format. This is
how most products release fixes. They are not even the slowest.
Look at Bookmanager/read VM. They seem to release a superseding ptf
every once in a while. For Bookmanager/read AIX they still do not
have a ptf that one can order via IBMLINK's SRD function, But you
can order one level set ptf thru IBMLINK's ETR function.
For HLASM they do not have level set ptf's per say. But since they
use part replacement and there are so few parts, it almost always
works out that way.
Source maintenance would be the ultimate controlled form of maintenance,
But since this product is not even open, I do not see IBM going this
route.
If they use replacement parts, since there is only one module for the
server, it implies level set. Shipping a level set, does not mean that
the files on the tape all have to have the same timestamp as it the
case with the current adsm/vm ptf tape. IBM could also keep multiple
level sets available.
Since this product is so new with HIPER ptf's it might save IBM some
work if they could speed up the packaging of ptf's for ordering via
IBMLINK or other electronic means.
So In summary, I think that is a bad idea to ask IBM-adsm to service adsm
product like every other IBM product. IBM-adsm needs to know which
products to emulate.
PS In an old post, CompuServe was listed as a source of fixes for adsm.
Are the fixes available on CompuServe more timely then those on
IBMLINK?
|
