Understood for the most part - sadly I can't get into the requirement area since I am not a valid user :(
There are issues with SHARE requirements as well that I pointed out in my prior reply. Take care -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Lionel B. Dyck Mainframe Systems Programmer - TRA Enterprise Operations (Station 200) (005OP6.3.10) Information and Technology, IT Operations and Services -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Ed Jaffe Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2017 2:03 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: IBM RFE's for z/OS - 2 to push On 3/30/2017 9:33 AM, Dyck, Lionel B. (TRA) wrote: > I have no idea as I can't get into the requirements area any longer. Perhaps > because I haven't been to a SHARE for several years. What I do know is that > both of these requirements are now over 100 votes and growing. The SHARE Requirements System can be found here: http://www.share.org/page/requirements-&-advocacy Many RFEs are essentially nonsense, entered by random individuals without the benefit of real discussion or IBM input. And, RFE "votes" don't carry as much weight as you might think because: 1. They are not votes at all. There is only LIKE or abstain. There is no negative voting and no scoring. (Even Facebook can do dislikes now.) 2. RFEs with too many votes are met with great skepticism. Dozens of LIKEs are too often attributed to a single customer with many employees. Development attempts to count them as a single vote only. 3. There is no non-SHARE way of ranking RFEs to help IBM understand customer priorities. RFE LIKEs are not very meaningful and the more time that elapses since an RFE was opened, the more skeptical development becomes about its importance relative to RFEs more recently authored, even if it continues to accumulate LIKEs. SHARE requirements are also RFEs, but they are vetted by the Requirements Committee, discussed by the members, receive scored votes (with negative voting allowed), and receive periodic ranking by the membership. IBM takes them much, much more seriously than run-of-the-mill RFEs. Periodic ranking provides IBM development with a top-down (1, 2, 3, ...) list of enhancements customers say they _really_ need based on current real-world priorities. That is the list IBM development works from. Just ask them. Of course, if development finds themselves working on something where there just happens to be an easy-to-implement non-SHARE RFE in the same area of the code, it might get done too. But, it's a crap shoot. -- Edward E Jaffe Phoenix Software International, Inc 831 Parkview Drive North El Segundo, CA 90245 http://www.phoenixsoftware.com/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
