Re: Processes after CRTSRVPGM

On Feb 16, 2008 12:40 PM, Vernon Hamberg <vhamberg@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Right on David - Steve is like the guy who wanted to put a basement
on his fish house. (It's cold here in Minnesota!) Either that, or
he's happy to rebind everything that uses that service program.

There's a difference between in-house development and vendor
development - vendors who distribute service programs to be used by
customers need to avoid causing pain - like rebinding the world.

I go again to the source (sic) - IBM - check out the signatures on
their service programs - lots of them are not generated - they are
some variant of the service program name with maybe SRVPGM at the
end. Maybe they make a policy of using generated for internal use
items only - have no idea. But we went with using the same signature
for most situations.

another complicating factor is when you use service programs with change
management software such as Turnover. As I recall, it took more than a day
of work to solve the riddle of how to promote a Turnover form containing a
service program. Where it is logical to add procedures to the core functions
service program, used by all applications, I will not do so. I cant
guarantee to the MIS director that changing a service program will not
impact the myriad other applications in his undermanned shop.