>>> On Thu, Dec 6, 2007 at 2:53 PM, in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "McKown, John" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: -snip- > But isn't that a managerial failure, rather than a technical failure?
I don't see that as a failure of either group involved. At the time, many of those mods were necessary, and the impact to moving to new releases was manageable for quite a while. As time went on, it became apparent that in most cases mods weren't a good thing, and they were largely phased out. The same is true of dump reading. I don't know how many years I went without reading a dump prior to leaving EDS. The management philosophy was "you're more valuable to us doing other things. Take the dump and ship it to IBM (or whomever)." As time passes, the industry matured more, and needs changed. -snip- > Now that Linux is ported to the System z and in use as production, does > that mean that people should stop publishing the source? Not that it is > possible, due to the GPL and the Linux development philosophy. Or does > is mean that Linux should never been use for mission critical > infrastructure? > > Or am I just misunderstanding this entire argument (likely)? I think some people think that way. Most people are just saying "don't go wild with the source, and put us back in the same position we were in with MVS long ago." And, at least in the case of the enterprise Linux distributions for the mainframe, I think that most people are avoiding that. Largely because most of the people working with them remember the pain involved in eliminating all those mods. (My particular project was with JES2 5.2.2 and moving all of EDS' mods into exits. Ouch.) Mark Post ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
