Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!torsqnt!hybrid!scifi!bywater!uunet!ukma!rex!samsung!sdd.hp.com!usc!cs.utexas.edu!romp!auschs!awdprime!levell.austin.ibm.com!julie
From: julie@levell.austin.ibm.com (Julie A. Levell)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.aix
Subject: Re: Making A request to IBM (Was: Re: How does one compile to assembly?)
Message-ID: <5958@awdprime.UUCP>
Date: 15 Mar 91 22:28:36 GMT
References: <96@softpro.stgt.sub.org> <1296@dkunix9.dk.oracle.com> <1991Mar15.123532.8036@odi.com>
Sender: news@awdprime.UUCP
Organization: IBM AWD, Austin
Lines: 52

In article <1991Mar15.123532.8036@odi.com> benson@odi.com (Benson I. Margulies) writes:
>From my experience, many of these messages are not correct.
>
>Defect support is for defects. Bugs. When you submit a defect, the
>person from defect support creates an APAR and sends it to the
>developer.

Sends it to the Change Team (or Level 3)

>If the developer decided that it is a design issue, and not a bug,
>they will tell defect support to tell you that "The software is
>working as designed." The APAR is rejected, and defect support will
>tell you politely but firmly that your only recourse is a DCR (Design
>Change Request). Defect support cannot and will not create such
>things. Your SE/marketing rep can do this, via a form called a PASR.
>If there is such a thing as a Design APAR, I've never had someone from
>defect support admit it or be willing to initiate it.

Not true.  Each apar is handled on a case by case basis, but when we
see an apar that is a design change, that just isn't do-able as a "code fix",
we close the apar and open a "Design" for development.  Then the architects 
look at it.  I've opened a few for security and lvm.

>Further, the developer can decide that your problem, while a bug, is a
>"permanent restriction," (i.e., too hard to fix) and decline to fix
>it, ever. This is what happened to me when I reported that AIX dbx,
>unlike any other, can't trace the stack below a sigaction-established
>SIGSEGV handler.

Can't comment on this one, I don't know the story behind it.

>There appears to be no way to instigate a management review of the
>designation "permanent restriction" via defect support. The
>immediately responsible developer calls the shot. All you can do is
>submit a DCR.

Again, not true.  Every apar that we close as "permanent restriction" is
brought to upper level management review.  I can't close PRS without
going thru managment.  We don't like telling customers
"that's just the way it is", but sometimes it does have to happen.

It's not a perfect system, but we're trying.

>Benson I. Margulies

Your humble Change Team servant,
Julie Levell 
-- 
*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=
Julie A. Levell        IBM Advanced Workstation Division         Austin, Texas
Internet: julie@aixwiz.austin.ibm.com    IBM VMNET:  JULIEL at AUSVMQ
DeskNet:      4C-29/994                      SpeakNet:  823-5178 (Tie 793-5178)