Re: Reason not to go to V6R1

I feel confident that since March 7 2005, when IBM initially started contacting external developers concerning the use of unsupported interfaces, that many requests have come into the i5/OS lab. I'm also confident that there are going to be quite a few changes in CL commands, APIs, and Exits to enable software to run on V6R1 even though the software was utilizing undocumented and unsupported interfaces in prior releases.

Bruce Vining


dr2@xxxxxxxx wrote:


We're hearing announcement date something like January 29th and our user
group just contacted IBM this week for an announcement meeting for DC
metro and Richmond... Not heard a solid G/A date...but then, who's left
to make the call after the latest office suffle?? :) Zeitler? :) Looks
to me that Gerstner's rumoured edict to Jarosh is still well entrenched...

I know that many vendors have been informed of the MI/Fast400 busting
issues that IBM is tweeking in 6.1 and for many there are IBM supplied
work arounds to AUTHORIZED vendors...but I've spoken with lots of vendors
and they've been at least put on notice...now, if they actually DID
anything about it...well....film at 11 on that one.. :) Am I expect
traffic on the MI400 listserver to pickup once it's out and people start
playing...time will tell...

Don in DC

Don,

I think that the spool thing got thrown in with the rest of the stuff.
The
only thing that matters (other than time, which is cheap now-a-days) is
the
"creation data" part of what used to be called "observability". I'm
through that on one partition, but there are lots of vendors that have
issues, and given their (not-so) fast response to inquiries, I would say
that this release may be in trouble.

A few facts:
o The release is not yet G.A.ed.
o IBM says that they have renewed the efforts to get to vendors,
although I can see no tangible evidence of this.

We will see what happens as G.A. gets closer. I don't think that IBM has
announced that date yet, but I get conflicting information from many
people.

Al

Al Barsa, Jr.
Barsa Consulting Group, LLC

400>390

"i" comes before "p", "x" and "z"
e gads

Our system's had more names than Elizabeth Taylor!

914-251-1234
914-251-9406 fax

http://www.barsaconsulting.com
http://www.taatool.com
http://www.systemiconnection.com/




dr2@xxxxxxxx
Sent by:
midrange-l-bounce To
s@xxxxxxxxxxxx "Midrange Systems Technical
Discussion"

01/08/2008 11:18 cc
AM
Subject
Re: Reason not to go to V6R1
Please respond to
Midrange Systems
Technical
Discussion

nge.com>

Al,

this is basically a Fast/400 buster wrapped up with a bunch of other
stuff... funny damn thing is that anyone still using Fast/400 most likely
isnt' going to be leaving that platform for a while...

I still can't get anyone to explain why SPOOL is undergoing conversion in
the same step/process as the MI level is undergoing conversion...

Don in DC

When we did CISC-to-RISC, IBM was in our publically faces about the
requirements for two years before. (I knew sometime before.) With
V6R1,
they screwed up and kept it a state secret. Shame on IBM, cause this is
what happens.

Al

--
This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing
list
To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l
or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.

--
This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing
list
To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l
or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.