Steve Smith wrote: >That said, I'm pretty sure that does not apply to Dave Jousma, as I've >worked with him before, and he does want to innovate.
Agreed, which is why I mentioned "management," which (I can now reveal) is shorthand for "a bureaucracy that doesn't count Dave Jousma among its members." :-) Dave Jousma wrote: >But, please don't compare z/OS to Windows or Linux where everyone and >their brother has personal copies at home to play with since their >inception. Why not compare in this respect? There were only some thousands of computers in the whole world when z/OS's distant ancestor debuted. Why artificially constrain z/OS to its distant ancestor's habitat and the state of the computing world as it existed in the mid-1960s? That doesn't make any sense. Linux's distant inspirational ancestor was much the same. Didn't UNIX run on Western Electric telephone switches at/near its birth, not common household appliances? The computing world has changed profoundly, *including* for/with z/OS. z/OS can also now run even on a pocket sized machine. >The fact is that what most of us on this list have learned in decades >of work experience can't be just "jumped into". What linux and windows >does "built-in" z platform requires manual care and feeding. OK, I happen to think z/OS is incredibly, amazingly special. No exaggeration: modern civilization depends on it. However, I completely disagree with you on this point. Linux (for example) can be, often is, *extraordinarily* complex. When was the last time you recompiled the z/OS kernel because you wanted to tweak a particular parameter or add a missing device driver? Talk about "manual care and feeding"! I *really* don't share your pessimism about developers' abilities to adopt and embrace z/OS. I've seen so many real human counterexamples, now and over many years. >We are doing a POC expected to be implemented project to migrate >the development efforts into iDZ/GIT/DBB/UCD/Jenkins managed development >pipeline. When we get there, we will be in a much better position to >support a ZD&T environment if it were to make sense. Excellent! Another tool in the toolbag, typically in conjunction with ZD&T, is z/OS on z/VM. That's yet another way for developers to get their "disposable" z/OS instances. IBM itself does a lot of development and testing using z/OS on z/VM. There are many ways to approach z/OS on z/VM, but one pattern that works particularly well if you already Linux on z/VM is just to add at least one CP and one engine's worth of z/VM licensing -- start with one if you'd like, that's great -- then to have a single "z/VM mode" development LPAR that spans your IFLs and that CP. Yes, you can do that (subcapacity z/VM, z/VM mode LPAR). Thus without changing the number of LPARs and barely changing your z/VM licensing, developers can spin up/down lots of disposable z/OS instances on z/VM. You can even using z/VM's cloud provisioning capabilities for "walk up" developer services. Whatever works, really, to empower and encourage developers. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Timothy Sipples IT Architect Executive, Industry Solutions, IBM Z & LinuxONE -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- E-Mail: sipp...@sg.ibm.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
