Conference iosg::all-in-1_v30

    Julie,
    
    I've taken the liberty of retitling your base note with the word
    co-existant instead of parallel to refelect the change in terminology
    and the fact that v3.0 co-existant systems are NOTHING like the
    dreaded v2.3 parallel systems.
    
    I'm sure that the expert didn't really mean parallel did he?
    
    Regards,
    
    Andrew.D.Wicks

    Andrew,

    Jackie is talker than Julie and lives in Florida but other than that
    they're different.  ;')

    Jackie's recollection is the same relative to what the young man in the
    bow tie said in his 'great' presentation.  It is most logical that
    co-existent systems should operate with a V2.3 system as virtually all
    of the real work is on the V3.0 side of things.  Graham did make some
    professional noises about not being sure that it was checked out.

    I am sure that he will be able to help us know if he or others can add
    more confidence to the ability for a customer (or site) running V2.3 to
    use this clever path.

    My unprofessional opinion (this is me, afterall) is that there would be
    no problem and that it's worth a try.

    Clearly, the very best approach is always to use a separate test system
    for 'parallel' work and testing.

    Keep smiling,
    don

    Even though I was dressed like a marketeer (Possibly only an English
    Street Marketeer, but who cares!), I was trying to tell the truth at
    the Expert training, and I've now got the rest of the facts I couldn't
    remember then.
    
    As Don said, all the hard work was in developing the V3.0 functionality
    and I was just being a lazy slob when  originally tried to only do
    coexistent systems with V2.4 so I didn't have to do all the testing
    twice. Fortunately my team are more diligent that I am, so they enabled
    support on V2.3 and tested it too. Not only that it seemed to work.
    
    I should repeat my professional noises, as Don described them, here.
    Although we did test both V2.3 and V2.4 co-ex systems, I would be being
    economical with the truth if I said that they were as fully tested as
    the normal system. However we did make sure that the important areas,
    particularly CM were covered fairly well.
    
    I think I described co-existent systems as a Badge-engineered parallel
    system at Expert training, so don't be too hard on Jackie's terminology
    Andy!
    
    Graham
    
    PS I've retitled this note with the correct spelling of co-existent :-)

Thanks for the replies, fellow ALL-IN-1'ers.  I will try the coexistance on the
customer TEST machine with 3.0 and 2.3 and post results here.  This will 
occur as soon as the kit ships.

I think the reason I used parallel and not the *co* word is because it's
easier to spell :-)

thanks again,

-jackie

The installation guide says that once you have got your customisations working
on the V3.0 part of your co-existant system then you should upgrade the 
V2.3/V2.4 part to V3.0, move across the customizations and delete the now
unneeded co-existant system.

Unfortunately the delete of the co-existant system will delete some things that
the 'live' V3.0 system needs (e.g. VMS accounts created for V3.0), leaving
you with a broken V3.0 system.

I believe the recommended way round this is to

- Install the co-existant system
- Get your V3.0 customisations working
- Save the customisations
- Delete the co-existant system
- Upgrade the V2.3/V2.4 system to V3.0
- restore your V3.0 customizations.

I'm sure Graham will correct me if I am wrong.

I have not seen the final release notes yet so I am not sure if this is in 
there? 

Terry

    Um I believe Terry is thinking of BL122D and not BL123
    
    Go easy on him GAP.
    
    Regards,
    
    Andrew.D.Wicks

    Agree with Andy (is that twice this week already? :-) ) the
    "opportunities" that the delete co-ex procedure gave you to mess up
    your V3.0 system have now been surrounded by some tests that check if
    the primary system has already been upgraded to V3.0 too.
    
    Graham

I'm glad to hear this has been fixed in BL123. I don't recall seeing it on the 
BL123 fix list, but then all this playing with the FCS is probably making me 
blind 8^}

Terry