RE: Perm. apply PTF's thoughts

["Andy Nolen-Parkhouse" <aparkhouse@xxxxxxxxx>]

Mike,

I have always advocated the permanent application of PTF's prior to a
release upgrade.  I take Rob's comments in another thread as true, if
you're not upgrading an application as part of an upgrade, then
permanently apply your PTF's by application and omit those program
products from the process.

For me it is a housekeeping issue, and perhaps overly compulsive on my
part.  I have not heard of problems with old-release remnants lying
around, it is just that I don't like the idea that they're there.

I do not believe in permanently applying PTF's in other circumstances.  I
would always leave the latest CUME in temporary status until it is time
for the next CUME.

Regards,
Andy Nolen-Parkhouse

> On Behalf Of Mike.Crump@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Perm. apply PTF's thoughts
> 
> Folks,
> 
> Historically, I've been remiss about permanently applying PTF's.
> Originally, my thought process was that normally you see it as an item
> on
> new releases with corresponding instructions to clean up disk space.
> I've
> never had storage problems around new release installs so I have
> forsaken
> that process in the name of time.
> 
> I'm beginning to wonder how wise that is.  Doesn't that leave some
> potential for PTF *SAVF's and other objects (potentially IFS) out there
> for
> cleanup?  And couldn't those objects be in many different places on the
> system (QSYSDIR, QIWS, QDNS, stream files in IFS directories, etc)?
> What
> do other people do with regards to perm apply of PTF's?  Do you think
> it is
> easier to perm apply PTF's prior to a new release as opposed to
> cleaning
> their tracks later or never?
> 
> 
> Michael Crump