On Wed, 25 Jul 2007 07:39:42 -0400, Peter Relson wrote:
>
>I've also been informed that, to my dismay, no updates will happen to
>any old books "ever". Updates will be made only in the forthcoming R9
>books.
>
For the matter that started this thread, that FIN-analogue is
sufficient. Of course, if
I wrote on 2007-07-25 08:19:01:
> I found the following in the front matter of several books from the z/OS
> MVS bookshelf:
>
> --
>
> IBM welcomes your comments. A form for readers’ comments may be provided
at
> the back of this document, or you may address your comments to the
> followin
Peter Relson wrote on 2007-07-25 07:39:42:
>
> Ugghh. The z/OS MVS books (i.e., the ones I am involved with) all have a
> page at the end "Readers' Comments -- We'd Like to Hear from You".
> I'm not sure why there is no electronic mechanism. I'll inquire.
>
> But that is not consistent across the
>You're off the hook, and if you've yet taken no action, it would be
>interesting to let it run its course and see whether Tech Pubs agrees
>with us.
The way our ID process seems to work today (at least in Poughkeepsie),
if someone suggests a change, the book owner contacts the technical
owner to s
Patrick O'Keefe wrote:
[...]
I've noticed that some recent IBM manuals (maybe only Tivoli
manuals, but still IBM) no longer include the RCF or any electronic
equivalent. Is there an IBM-wide RCF (where "F" now stands
for "function") that can be used for those manuals not providing
their own? I
On Tue, 24 Jul 2007 11:04:35 -0500, Paul Gilmartin
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>...
>>Minor chide: It is too bad that folks take their valuable time on ibm-
main
>>
>Cf. the "Heresy" thread.
Ah, but that thread allowed us to streach our pedantry muscles,
an invaluable service for system programm
6 matches
Mail list logo
