On Dec 8, 2003, at 10:18 PM, Chris Cunningham wrote:

> Along with this, if Monticello could capture the fact that there is a 
> class change with consequences (potential conflicts), it could then 
> scan ahead to find possible method changes that would mitigate these 
> conflicts.  If it found them, it could go ahead and apply them, and 
> the user would then not get the notification.  Something similar could 
> also be done with change-set loading.

That sounds reasonable.  It's something I might look at when I get back 
into town - I'm gonna be pretty much offline for the next month or so, 
but I'll hopefully have some time in January to get Monticello 
development rolling again.

In the meantime, however, it seems like if we just do the same thing 
for block temps that we do for method temps, the immediate problem will 
go away.  Right?