Touche. Since I don't want verbosity in my syslog/operlog, I failed to notice the consequence for those who might. The original intent of explanatory messages was to assist the programmer or production control person or whoever has responsibility for fixing the problem to better understand the failure. If a job owner cannot get access to joblog after the fact, that would seem to be a problem inviting operational reform, not functional changes in z/OS.
BTW in ESP conversations on this topic, I suggested that another candidate for explanatory messages might be the menagerie of x78/x0A failures that I can never keep straight: get vs. free, private vs. common, above vs. below, etc. I can use all the help I can get. . . JO.Skip Robinson SCE Infrastructure Technology Services Electric Dragon Team Paddler SHARE MVS Program Co-Manager 626-302-7535 Office 323-715-0595 Mobile [email protected] From: Edward Jaffe <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Date: 05/04/2012 10:05 AM Subject: Re: Comments on DFSMS verbose messages? Sent by: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <[email protected]> On 5/4/2012 8:56 AM, Skip Robinson wrote: > I like the solution. The installation can turn verbose on or off globally. > The new 'filter' allows us to direct long explanations to just the > programmer--my preference--or to syslog/operlog. Why complain about 'too > much control'? You misunderstood. With the new design, the messages will NEVER appear on syslog/operlog. This is the complaint. -- Edward E Jaffe Phoenix Software International, Inc 831 Parkview Drive North El Segundo, CA 90245 310-338-0400 x318 [email protected] http://www.phoenixsoftware.com/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
