Apparently, in the version of zAppBuild proposed by the IBM team, the presence in the Git Repository of the application-conf folder, and in this folder of the applications.propertiesfile with a certain number of parameters, or other properties files, are mandatory.
This is not our vision of things because we want standardization, and the Applications (Git Repository), with some exceptions, must not modify the general operation defined at the Enterprise level (configuration on z/OS-USS system).
We will therefore modify the zAppBuild scripts so that the informations at the Git Repository level are all optional, if possible.
We would like the zAppBuild version proposed by the IBM team to also evolve in this direction, which would allow us to stay as close as possible to this version in order to be able to benefit from future developments, (if we create a fork of the zAppBuild IBM version we will have more and more difficulty to reintegrate into our version the changes made to the reference version).
Hi,
Apparently, in the version of zAppBuild proposed by the IBM team, the presence in the Git Repository of the
application-conffolder, and in this folder of theapplications.propertiesfile with a certain number of parameters, or other properties files, are mandatory.This is not our vision of things because we want standardization, and the Applications (Git Repository), with some exceptions, must not modify the general operation defined at the Enterprise level (configuration on z/OS-USS system).
We will therefore modify the zAppBuild scripts so that the informations at the Git Repository level are all optional, if possible.
We would like the zAppBuild version proposed by the IBM team to also evolve in this direction, which would allow us to stay as close as possible to this version in order to be able to benefit from future developments, (if we create a fork of the zAppBuild IBM version we will have more and more difficulty to reintegrate into our version the changes made to the reference version).