If an empty dataset is on the APF list, it already exists. Why it exists and why it is on the list are different questions.
Adding a member to an existing empty dataset is NO different than adding a member to an existing populated one. What is the additional exposure? > -----Original Message----- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]] On > Behalf Of Charles Mills > Sent: Wednesday, August 03, 2016 11:34 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Adding Module to an empty APFed Library > > Because you should minimize the APF list to the smallest possible set. A > dataset that does > not exist is a dataset that does not need to be in the APF list. > > Charles > > -----Original Message----- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]] On > Behalf Of retired mainframer > Sent: Wednesday, August 03, 2016 12:39 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Adding Module to an empty APFed Library > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]] > > On Behalf Of Lizette Koehler > > Sent: Wednesday, August 03, 2016 8:07 AM > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: Re: Adding Module to a empty APFed Library > > > > Just a note. Auditors hate it when we have an APF list entry with no > > dataset. Makes them cringe. > > I wonder why. The only time it would have any effect is if something is > added to it. > Adding to an empty APF library is hardly different than adding to a populated > one. > > Did they ever discuss what additional exposure they thought it created? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
