In <listserv%201001051154584348.0...@bama.ua.edu>, on 01/05/2010
at 11:54 AM, Paul Gilmartin <paulgboul...@aim.com> said:
>o Issuing HOLDDATA is not syncronized with our test cycle which
> drives our cumulative maintenance releases.
Do you build your cum service with the then current HOLDDATA? If not, why
not.
>o It's our understanding that many customers age corrective
> service on the shelf before APPLYing -- let their peers be
> early adopters. Such customers would need to download HOLDDATA
> separately after ageing the PTFs (unless they were naive enough
> to be satisfied with stale HOLDDATA).
Protect your customers, but don't hobble them.
>It would help the first of these cases, but not the second, if we
>reissued the cumulative maintenance whenever there were new HOLDDATA
I wouldn't expect, or want that, although there might be a case for
rebuilding the cum service when a fix for a PE became available.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
ISO position; see <http://patriot.net/~shmuel/resume/brief.html>
We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress.
(S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
