|
midrange.com
There may be a little confusion going on here. I know some people copy the
whole system to their environment and then run with that. The way I have
always worked is to make any changes in my environment (lib list, menus &
tasks) but leave everything that is unmodified where it is. The 9000
range of tasks is OK in the blank environment but we feel more comfortable
using our custom environment, especially as we need it for modified
standard tasks. We have a few tasks where we override the job and output
queues for the entire system.
I'll be charitable and say I think the comments may have been taken out of
context, but then vital information such as this should be explained fully
and it is the job of the messenger to ensure the correct message gets
through. At least it prompted one of the liveliest discussions in a long
while.
Richard Caldicott
Director of Implementations
& Efficiency
Tandy Brands Accessories
817-548-0090 extn 146
"Chris Tringham"
<ctringham@i-cable To: "System 21 Users"
<system21@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
.com> cc:
Sent by: Subject: [SYSTEM21] The
"standard" environment
system21-bounces@m
idrange.com
02/15/2005 08:22
AM
Please respond to
System 21 Users
Long ago, I was persuaded that the correct way to set up S21 was to leave
the blank environment totally alone. Any changes (to library lists,
tasks, menus) would go into the appropriate environments. This advice is
repeated in the "redbook" that came out 3-4 years ago.
Now, Geac are saying that this is not the way to go. Instead, any new
tasks should be created in the blank environment and library lists should
be amended in the blank environment. They say that as long as you use
library mapping and follow their standards for customised tasks everything
will be fine, and that this setup is easier to maintain and understand.
No need to define the applications in your "standard" environment because
you don't need them - you can use the blank environment.
There are some obvious benefits such as not needing to authorize users to
both the blank and standard environments. However, I still have some
doubts, but I am not sure whether I have just been thoroughly
indoctrinated in the old way of thinking and just can't think straight.
For example, if I want to change certain jobs to run in different job
queues, I can change the task definition in the live and/or test
environment and it works fine, but I haven't touched the standard
definition. If I make changes like that in the blank environment they may
get overwritten by a PTF or new release. Or is there some smarter way to
achieve the same thing?
Any thoughts? And have Geac announced this change in thinking somewhere
that I haven't noticed?
_______________________________________________
This is the System 21 Users (SYSTEM21) mailing list
To post a message email: SYSTEM21@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/system21
or email: SYSTEM21-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
at http://archive.midrange.com/system21.
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.
