Re: Fw: CHGMABRDAT

[Dan <dan27649@xxxxxxxxx>]

I know this is different countries, different regulations, but I think that
here in the states, financial institutions would not be allowed to do what
you are proposing to do nowadays.  The auditors would be swarming, and heads
would fall.

With all due respect, Suharto, given your description of the state of your
company's source control, I'm glad I'm not a customer of any of those 30+
banks you support.  You mention a need to "keep the system integrity", but I
would argue that it's already lost.

I think you can see the kind of damage that could be wrought if this tool
was used incorrectly or was used by someone with malicious intentions.

On a related side note:  Have you thought about a simple utility to save a
source member (or group of members) in a save file, and restore it to the
library that you want the source member to be in?  If I recall correctly,
this will result in the restored member having a new creation timestamp, but
the modification timestamp will be the same as for the member that was
saved.

- Dan

On 2/21/06, Suharto <sastrow@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Dear Thomas,
>
> I do not mind with the German command and help text, would youplease send
> a
> copy of this command to me please.
>
> This is the reasons why we need to do this:
>
> I am an IT Consultant, currently work for the largest IT Banking Solution
> Provider in Indonesia, which support outsourcing for more than 30 Banks
> (Conventional and Islamic Bank). At present we have several library which
> consist of thousand of Objects Programs, most of them was compiled from
> scattered of physical source file.
>
> We need to do "house keeping" of our systems.
> To keep the system integrity we need to merge source members without
> changes
> the original timestamp. So we don't need to recompiling of the programs.
>
> Thanks and best regards,
> Suharto