On Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 6:55 AM, Shane Ginnane <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Thu, 20 Nov 2014 11:41:00 +0000, Martin Packer wrote: > > >I'm not a WLM developer. I'm hoping someone who is will answer that point. > >If not we'll have to raise a requirement. > > If you're raising a requirement, ask them why the hell it was architected > like that in the first place. No doubt the answer will be > "Broken-As-Designed". > There has to be so much scope for improvement - straight xml would be > fine; at least we could write stuff to massage it ourselves easily. > Why? Because somebody thought that using ISPF would make it "better". Likely because, at the time, all Windows admins knew was point'n'click (curious that current Windows servers have a CLI for configuration and it is recommended instead of the GUI). IBM wants z/OS to be "friendly". I love the IODF versus old-style SYSGEN. But I don't really much care for the HCD application (don't have HCM). I would prefer a complete "source code" based system where I have a "configuration deck" which I could "compile" in batch to create a complete IODF / IOCDS. I'm not holding my breath. z/OSMF is the way IBM is going because the money people in the most companies today don't seem to want experts, they want cheap labor. Like most of today's people who vote "good enough" instead of "excellent" with their wallets. > > Shane ... > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > -- The temperature of the aqueous content of an unremittingly ogled culinary vessel will not achieve 100 degrees on the Celsius scale. Maranatha! <>< John McKown ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
