>>Doru,
>>
>>I would look into Visual SourceSafe. It allows developers to copy down files to their local drive, work on them, and then copy up their version changes when done. This will solve a lot of your contention problems.
>
>We don't have contention problems between developers.
>It looks like we need to choose between:
>

>1. Include class libraries in compiled .EXE
>
>   Advantages:    - we can pack .VCXs any time
>                  - safer, changes made in a class will not break existing
>                    applications (I believe this is what Jim suggested)
>
>   Disadvantages: - changes made in a class are not visible to users until
>                    we recompile the .EXEs - about 100 in the system. And,
>                    to  pick up the new version users will need to go out
>                    and then back in the system
>                  - bigger size for .EXE
>
>2. Exclude class libraries from compiled .EXE
>
>   Advantages:    - changes made in a class are "live" - no need to
>                    recompile  the .EXEs
>                  - smaller size for .EXE
>
>   Disadvantages: - we can NOT pack .VCXs unless ask all users out - there can
>                    be 50 users in at any given time.
>
>

>
>Tough choice!
>
>dz

Doru:

Another big disadvantage of excluding class libraries from compiled exe is disk I/O. Believe it or not, you will take a big performance hit if you don't compile your class libraries into your exe. Also, if your vcx's live on the server, you will generate a fair bit of extra network traffic.

JW