Skip to Main Content
IBM Z Software


This portal is to open public enhancement requests against IBM Z Software products. To view all of your ideas submitted to IBM, create and manage groups of Ideas, or create an idea explicitly set to be either visible by all (public) or visible only to you and IBM (private), use the IBM Unified Ideas Portal (https://ideas.ibm.com).


Shape the future of IBM!

We invite you to shape the future of IBM, including product roadmaps, by submitting ideas that matter to you the most. Here's how it works:

Search existing ideas

Start by searching and reviewing ideas and requests to enhance a product or service. Take a look at ideas others have posted, and add a comment, vote, or subscribe to updates on them if they matter to you. If you can't find what you are looking for,

Post your ideas
  1. Post an idea.

  2. Get feedback from the IBM team and other customers to refine your idea.

  3. Follow the idea through the IBM Ideas process.


Specific links you will want to bookmark for future use

Welcome to the IBM Ideas Portal (https://www.ibm.com/ideas) - Use this site to find out additional information and details about the IBM Ideas process and statuses.

IBM Unified Ideas Portal (https://ideas.ibm.com) - Use this site to view all of your ideas, create new ideas for any IBM product, or search for ideas across all of IBM.

ideasibm@us.ibm.com - Use this email to suggest enhancements to the Ideas process or request help from IBM for submitting your Ideas.

Status Not under consideration
Created by Guest
Created on Sep 30, 2016

Better management of IMS PGM name to Java class name mappings

For IMS Java programms (both Java batch and Java message processing programs) a mapping between IMS program names and Java class names must be provided in IMS PROCLIB member DFSJVMAP. Such a mapping within this member looks like this:

IMSJAVPG=com/ibm/ims/java/sample/MyApplication

You always have to edit the PROCLIB member, if you want to define a new Java program to IMS or if the Java class name respectively the package of the class has been changed. This is not a good way to define this, because typically an application developer would not be permitted to edit something in IMS PROCLIB.

A better way to handle this would be to store this mapping information directly with the program definition ...in a RDDS or in IMS repository - of course APPLCTN macro makes not much sense (therefor also an IMS system programmer or administrator has to do the definition). In the case the mapping information is stored with the program definition, it could be manipulated by IMS type 2 commands. An application developer could be permitted to execute these commands. No IMS PROCLIB member has to be edited, IMS system programmers or administrators would not have to do the mapping definition and mapping definitions would be more flexible.

Having also a possibility to define this mapping in IMS Explorer would be the best for a Java application developer. In this case he would not need to have knowledge about IMS PROCLIB or SPOC and IMS type 2 commands. IMS Explorer could use IMS Enterprise Suite in background to generate IMS type 2 commands that are sent to IMS through IMS Connect to manipulate the mapping in the IMS program definition.

The way to solve the problem I am proposing here might not be the only ways and maybe also not the best way. We are open to discuss other solutions for this problem.

Idea priority High
  • Guest
    Reply
    |
    Mar 26, 2019

    Thank you for your interest in keeping IMS a vital and successful product. Software development has continuously evolved during IMS's lifetime, and so has IMS itself. We have kept pace with, adopted, and implemented many industry standard best practices within our organization, including Continuous Delivery, Design Thinking, and Agile.

    At this time, after further review this request for enhancement, we have decided to reject it. The reason we are rejecting RFE ID 95260 is because given our current priorities we cannot in good faith get to this within 18 months from the date that it is being opened. We value the required requirement and we will keep consider if priority changed. You are also welcome to resubmit this RFE at a later date and we will reconsider.

    If you have any further question, please contact us.

    Thank you!
    Haley Fung - hfung@us.ibm.com

  • Guest
    Reply
    |
    Apr 17, 2017

    As a different customer from the submitter, I really like the idea of using type-2 commands--so long as we can limit developers to only issuing that specific command against only their own programs.

  • Guest
    Reply
    |
    Apr 14, 2017

    We recognize this as an issue, but need to know the complete solution for the problem.

  • Guest
    Reply
    |
    Oct 18, 2016

    Due to processing by IBM, this request was reassigned to have the following updated attributes:
    Brand - Analytics Platform
    Product family - IMS
    Product - IMS Transaction Manager
    Component - Application Enablement
    Operating system - IBM z/OS
    Source - None

    For recording keeping, the previous attributes were:
    Brand - Servers and Systems Software
    Product family - zBLC family
    Product - zBLC
    Component - zBLC Requirements
    Operating system - IBM z/OS
    Source - None