I don't think Jim was clear at all in regards to what IBM is *really*
trying to nudge people toward. In fact, it seems to me he completely
dodged the issue, even though he warned ominously about it.
Examples:
On Tue, Jun 4, 2024 at 9:24 AM Jim Oberholtzer
<midrangel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
IBM is trying to get you to start planning for the near future and preparing you for what’s to come. All you need do is listen. How old is V7R5, and how old was V7R4 when it was released? Clue phone is ringing, time to answer it.
On Tue, Jun 4, 2024 at 11:28 AM Jim Oberholtzer
<midrangel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
That all said, read the tea leaves. They don't ship the old Java Versions
any more.
The part that's clear is that people's existing software isn't going
to simply stop working in the near(ish) term.
But the clue phone and the tea leaves apparently are Jim's way of
saying that at some point in the future, you *won't* be able to just
keep using that software.
What Justin, Gavin, and Jeff are asking is: OK, fine, we're trying to
prepare now, for that future where we can't use these existing pieces
of software. What are our options?
Beyond "[write your own] or DBU, or one of the many other commercial
utilities available" in the case of replacing DFU, nothing has been
offered in this thread. IBM's listed suggestions are nice, but they
don't cover everything that the deprecated software does.
Ultimately, I don't think there currently exist any satisfactory
replacements, even commercially, for some of the things that
*eventually* may go away completely. It would appear that "planning
for the future" consists of writing your own tools, if you have the
expertise; or changing your workflow and/or the nature of your
deliverables, because some functionality you're using now will simply
not be available in that future.
John Y.
midrange.com
