Skip to main content
Status: Delivered

I'm suggesting for pre-existing components (in baseline) that in addition to changmen zmf requiring checkout, that changeman should also require and edit (NOT a S1 / Stage from external source). This way an audit trail in user worklist (UL) is always in place as an edit-stage. thoughts??

Status: Delivered

I'm suggesting for pre-existing components (in baseline) that in addition to changmen zmf requiring checkout, that changeman should also require and edit (NOT a S1 / Stage from external source). This way an audit trail in user worklist (UL) is always in place as an edit-stage. thoughts??

Hi Mike, many thanks for your idea. You and I had the benefit of discussing this at xChange 2015, so I understand the background of your request. Allow me to add some context here, and feel free to add on. Let's see if we can drive some further comments from the ZMF customers and get some traction for your idea. Your requirement is in regards to a code review process you have implemented as a 'release manager'. You are using the component userid worklist function (query package, then select 'Component Userid Worklist') to identify components in the package that have been edited. These are the components that need to undergo a code review in advance of the package install. You enforce checkout for baseline components, using the checkout enforcement rule. You are suggesting that an additional option be made available to disallow stage from development (S1), if the checked out component resides in the ZMF package? Correct? The root of your requirement is to be able to identify 'edited' components using the component userid worklist panel. Please add to or correct my understanding. Cheers, Jeff
Status: Delivered

I'm suggesting for pre-existing components (in baseline) that in addition to changmen zmf requiring checkout, that changeman should also require and edit (NOT a S1 / Stage from external source). This way an audit trail in user worklist (UL) is always in place as an edit-stage. thoughts??

Hi Guys, Sorry for this late response. So if in the meantime you all have a proper solution working, disregard the comment :-) 1. We have created a prototype for an automated code review process using the Component Activity File (CAF) 2. In the CAFwe keep the status and comments of the code reviewer 3. In addition to it, we have an ISPF applications managing the CAFs a) When a CAF is "rejected" the related object is set to INCOMP (and it's related ILODs are deleted) b) When the related object is edited the CAF is set to INCOMP c) When the CAF is approved the CAF is set to ACTIVE d) The release manager has a reporting job giving an overview of all components in the release and their code review status 4. Audit validates it all Cheers Johan
Status: Delivered

I'm suggesting for pre-existing components (in baseline) that in addition to changmen zmf requiring checkout, that changeman should also require and edit (NOT a S1 / Stage from external source). This way an audit trail in user worklist (UL) is always in place as an edit-stage. thoughts??

Hi,  in fear in our concurrent developing environment that this would cause us issues if it can not be a customization like  feature.

I understand they why's of request, but i would like to suggest that implementation be optional either on Global/Application panel,  HLLX or ASM exists.

 

Status: Delivered

I'm suggesting for pre-existing components (in baseline) that in addition to changmen zmf requiring checkout, that changeman should also require and edit (NOT a S1 / Stage from external source). This way an audit trail in user worklist (UL) is always in place as an edit-stage. thoughts??

Needs clarification. There are 3 comments as well as the original request, a clarification  was asked for 6 years ago, and the next response 2 years later doesn't address the request JJ made, namely 'do you mean have an option to prevent S1 if component exists in package already'. 

Status: Delivered

I'm suggesting for pre-existing components (in baseline) that in addition to changmen zmf requiring checkout, that changeman should also require and edit (NOT a S1 / Stage from external source). This way an audit trail in user worklist (UL) is always in place as an edit-stage. thoughts??

This is covered with admin parameter Staging Restriction Level of 3, which is the restriction of stage from development for an existing component.

Terms & ConditionsAccessibility statement