----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Klein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibm-main
Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2005 8:45 AM
Subject: Fw: Another OS/390 to z/OS 1.4 migration question (COBOL)
What is not self-describing about these is why they suddenly started
appearing when the programmer hadn't changed any of his code, that's what!
If messages start appearing after a migration of compilers, then SOMEONE
(application programmer or systems programmer) SHOULD have the sense to
check in the "Migration Guide".
Furthermore, IMHO, anyone (systems programmer) who does a migration of
compilers and does NOT look at what compiler options are DOCUMENTED as
changing and figuring out what implications this has for their shop, isn't
doing their job.
If the complain was (which is NOT true) that this isn't documented as a
CHANGE in both the Migration and Installation manuals, then I would say -
yes, there is a problem, but this one just isn't in that category.
Bill,
How about my case, where the failing program wasn't compiled until 6 months
after the COBOL migration? HTF were we supposed to relate that failure to
the bloody COBOL compiler upgrade? WTF do you guys have against IBM
providing at least a programmer response field for each message? I just
don't get why you guys continue to think that providing messages without a
response field is acceptable. I bet you think that the BPX messages coming
out of ISHELL are also self-documenting.
Regards,
Tom Conley
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
