On Fri, 19 Nov 2010 18:29:26 -0800, Edward Jaffe <[email protected]> wrote:
> >LOL! This has been going on so long that there is even a SHARE requirement from >the 1980s against a similar message produced by this very same "brain dead" >IKJTSOxx parser. > >We came across this a few months ago during a meeting of the SHARE MVS Core >Technologies Project Requirements Committee. We were all pretty astonished. > >I guess IBM refused to take an APAR so the customer was forced to use the >requirements process. A lot of good it did him... > >-- Ed, If you've given up, I can't help. Over the years, I have helped a number of customers get changes made to messages (primarily for automation purposes). This was done by the customer opening a formal complaint. Saying a message is useless is a non-starter; stating that it lacks sufficient information to identify the problem it is reporting and that it causes a great deal of manual effort to be expended by precious system programming resource is a much better way to describe the problem that the message causes. Fixing a problem like this is going to be a business decision; you need to describe the problem the message is causing in terms of the business impact that it has on a customer. Lost productivity, lost time, etc. W. Kevin Kelley -- IBM POK Lab -- z/OS Core Technical Development ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
