In <[email protected]>, on 04/24/2012
at 09:06 AM, "Joel C. Ewing" <[email protected]> said:
>SMP/E dialogs do not work that way. Users do not share the same
>variables directly, they share the same list of "named" maintenance
>projects
Is that a new function? I don't recall ever seeing named projects in
the dialogs.
>Yes, you can deduce most of the state information from the CSI,
>possibly with help from the SMP/E log datasets; but it takes much
>more work and adds unnecessary opportunity for human error.
Isn't it the other way around? The state information in the ISPF
variables may be stale if you RECEIVE updated HOLDDATA, while the
state information in the CSI is current.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
ISO position; see <http://patriot.net/~shmuel/resume/brief.html>
We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress.
(S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
