>
>Hi Bret,
>
>We use the same approach here and I'm not happy about it. First of all, since I'm not the person, who is responsible for our classes update, each change, which I think is necessary, I need to explain in lots of e-mails to finally have a rejected message or implemented it not the way I wanted.

Yeah it is an approach that has some drawbacks and is not the best for all applications. But it has worked well here. We all work in quads (cubicles) so talking to each other is not problem. We have had long debates about things, but mostly it works well.

>
>Another problem:
>
>We have a Developer server, a Live server + each developer has his/her own local copy of everything. The task of maintaining all these systems in sync seems too complicated. I finally mostly work on the Developer server itself, not on my local drive, since it has outdated applications anyway... Sometimes I forgot to make a backups, so it may lead to some serious problems. Fortunately enough, I always know, that I'm doing...

Keeping things in Synq, backups, and all are very important indeed if this system is to work. But since we have only one major application (a few minor ones that are in house work) then it is not too hard to ensure all the above. But I feel my life and all the programmers will be getting a bit complicate here shortly as the money would like all VFP exe stuff to go to the web. In fact I am working on just that right now. An experiment taking a section of the App to the web (query only) using Cold Fusion and FoxWeb. I know it will be 3 steps forward and 2 steps back until I feel I get things into an easily maintenable system.