Steve writes:
>> patch has evidently altered the PURGE entrypoint functionality.
...
> If it wasn't documented adequately in the Communicator, it's probably OK to
> complain about that, but we don't want to harass HP for doing, in this case,
> exactly what we asked them to do, exactly the way we asked them to do it.

Sorry, but there's no evidence apparent that we asked them to do "exactly"
anything.

The SIGIMAGE enhancement list has always been somewhat less than precise.
(e.g., the 'what *does* "FIELD A = FIELD B" really mean?' debate this week
at SIGIMAGE.)

In the case of this enhancement, it was probably something like "add
confirmation before purging a database".  Unfortunately, that fails
to specify: interactive runs?  batch runs?  runs with stdin/stdlist that
aren't duplicative/interactive?  And, yes, runs with the "PURGE" entrypoint.

In retrospect, it would appear that the enhancement should probably have
been something like:

   1) if using PURGE entrypoint, don't ask for confirmation

   2) if in batch, or stdin/stdlist aren't duplicative/interactive pair,
      then don't ask for confirmation.

   3) otherwise, ask for confirmation.

--
Stan Sieler                                          [log in to unmask]
                                     http://www.allegro.com/sieler.html