Re: [SYSTEM21] The "standard" environment

[John.Mcpherson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]

Chris,

I am not sure who you spoke to at Geac, but this is the silliest thing I
have heard from them recently.  If you change a task / menu / library list
in the blank environment and at a later date get a PTF that updates these,
they will overwrite any changes that you have made,  It would be like
modifying a standard source code and keeping it in the OSLxxS3 library.

It may make things simpler in the short term, but I can assure you it will
cause you a vast amount of extra work in the future.

Cheers,
John




                                                                           
             "Chris Tringham"                                              
             <ctringham@i-cabl                                             
             e.com>                                                     To 
             Sent by:                  "System 21 Users"                   
             system21-bounces@         <system21@xxxxxxxxxxxx>             
             midrange.com                                               cc 
                                                                           
                                                                   Subject 
             15/02/2005 14:22          [SYSTEM21]   The "standard"         
                                       environment                         
                                                                           
             Please respond to                                             
              System 21 Users                                              
             <system21@midrang                                             
                  e.com>                                                   
                                                                           
                                                                           




Long ago, I was persuaded that the correct way to set up S21 was to leave
the blank environment totally alone.  Any changes (to library lists,
tasks, menus) would go into the appropriate environments.  This advice is
repeated in the "redbook" that came out 3-4 years ago.

Now, Geac are saying that this is not the way to go.  Instead, any new
tasks should be created in the blank environment and library lists should
be amended in the blank environment.  They say that as long as you use
library mapping and follow their standards for customised tasks everything

will be fine, and that this setup is easier to maintain and understand.
No need to define the applications in your "standard" environment because
you don't need them - you can use the blank environment.

There are some obvious benefits such as not needing to authorize users to
both the blank and standard environments.  However, I still have some
doubts, but I am not sure whether I have just been thoroughly
indoctrinated in the old way of thinking and just can't think straight.

For example, if I want to change certain jobs to run in different job
queues, I can change the task definition in the live and/or test
environment and it works fine, but I haven't touched the standard
definition.  If I make changes like that in the blank environment they may

get overwritten by a PTF or new release.  Or is there some smarter way to
achieve the same thing?

Any thoughts?  And have Geac announced this change in thinking somewhere
that I haven't noticed?


_______________________________________________
This is the System 21 Users (SYSTEM21) mailing list
To post a message email: SYSTEM21@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/system21
or email: SYSTEM21-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
at http://archive.midrange.com/system21.