I'd suggest just choosing version 9.6.0.10, which just had a java update over 9.6.0.9.
There are quite a few issues with 9.6.0.11.
1. Refactor doesn't work
a. work around is to temporarily comment out the existing definition, do the refactor then un-comment the definition
2. Source Resequence on save doesn't work.
a. Work around is to use the Source menu *every**single**time**you**save**
3. RocketAldon open for Browse opens for Edit instead, allowing edits to non-checked out source members.
a. Work around, open the file twice for browse.
4. RocketAldon compile from Aldon's compile-option causes Event File error.
a. Seems to generate an error without impacting the overall compile. So it's just annoying.
5. Update to 9.6.0.11 Fails if you previously installed the Local Help feature.
a. RDI has corrupted the Local Help feature and added *some* of the help into base product.
b. Work around is to manually remove the Local Help plugin prior to doing the update.
6. Are there Any More?
The most annoying issue for me is the resequence at save, since that breaks the line number represented in Debug and in Error messages.
It's hard enough trying to get everyone to turn on the option. When the option doesn't work it just creates a mess for down the road.
I prefer not to install over the network. I think it's too slow and is impacted if your company throttles all the bandwidth.
I use the IBM Packaging Utility to merge the install repositories together in order to build one repository I can install/update from.
This is nice because I can generally build a smaller repository, and that smaller repository can by copied to the install machine for the install/update.
This allows the person to continue to work with the current version until the repository is downloaded. Then the update/install is very quick. Otherwise they have to sit there for over an hour to get the download/install to complete. Time is money.
Chris Hiebert
Senior Programmer/Analyst
Disclaimer: Any views or opinions presented are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the company.
From: WDSCI-L <wdsci-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of Mike Hockings
Sent: Thursday, October 21, 2021 8:06 PM
To: Rational Developer for IBM i <wdsci-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [WDSCI-L] RDi download
The wor
The work around is to temporarily comment out the existing definition, do
the refactor then un-comment the definition
Mike
Mike Hockings, M.Eng., P.Eng.
DevOps for Enterprise
IBM Developer for z Systems and Power Systems Software Technical Support
IBM Canada Ltd. Laboratory
hockings@xxxxxxxxxx<mailto:hockings@xxxxxxxxxx>
voice 1-905-413-3199 T/L 313-3199 ITN 23133199
From: "Troy Foster via WDSCI-L" <wdsci-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:wdsci-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
To: wdsci-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:wdsci-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: "Troy Foster" <tfoster@xxxxxxxxxx<mailto:tfoster@xxxxxxxxxx>>
Date: 2021/10/21 05:18 PM
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [WDSCI-L] RDi download
Sent by: "WDSCI-L" <wdsci-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:wdsci-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
If you deal with a lot of old code, you might not want to update to
9.6.0.11.
Refactor doesn't work the way it used to.
If you want to change a field name to one that already exists in the
code/display file/ file/table, it will not let you.
IBM is looking at it.
The link below caused refactor, to me, to be unusable.
https://www.ibm.com/support/pages/apar/SE76366.
midrange.com
