Hi all!

Quoting Avi Bryant <avi at beta4.com>:
> On Mon, 28 Oct 2002, [ISO-8859-1] Göran Hultgren wrote:
> 
> > So in short - if you intend to use DVS I see no need for CVSTProj.
> Sqcvs on the
> > other hand could be a nice partner with DVS, but unless you like to
> code - that
> > isn't true yet.
> 
> Perhaps we could take a couple of hours at OOPSLA and try to make this
> integration a reality?

Yep, I am all for that. Silly enough it would probably work just fine already
because the only "crucial" operations I haven't added are "add" and "remove"
IIRC. And since DVS typically don't have many files... :-)

What about that btw - what is your reasoning about having one file per package
(instead of say one file per class)? It sort of "defeats" interesting properties
in CVS I think. But you may have very good reasons of course.

And another thing, what do you think about the "decisions about how we proceed
with modules" I have been trying to get people buzzing about?

regards, Göran


Göran Hultgren, goran.hultgren at bluefish.se
GSM: +46 70 3933950, http://www.bluefish.se
\"Department of Redundancy department.\" -- ThinkGeek