>Dragan & Vlad,
>
>I can re-compile the project under another name, but I can not delete none of them untill I issue clear all and close all in command window. This is true for any projects and as my colleague just told me, this is by VFP design.
>
>Anyway, the problem with DataDict lies somewhere else.
>
>On one machine I run job, which uses DataDict step. Then I close this job.
>I go to another machine and try to re-compile DataDict. I can recompile it under another name, but can not do the same under name DataDict. I also can copy the whole directory to another place.

That's odd, but... if one of the instances of Fox, somewhere, still keeps any of the classes from your app instantiated, or has Set Proc To any of the code within it, or has any of the included .fxp files running - whatever the reason - then Fox keeps that file open. What surprises me is that you're still able to copy it; maybe it keeps it open read-only, which would explain it (still I'm not sure it would allow copying - but then I'm not so current with subtle nuances of modern versions of Windows).

One thing I like to do in situations like this is to have such a thing launched by name, where name would be in some lookup table. You then simply rebuild it under a different name, change the name in the table to that name, and the next one launches the new version.

Last time I was using that I was actually having a batch file (DOS/Novell 4.02 days) in a directory everyone had in their path, and edited the batch file each time, just putting a different executable name there. Worked like a charm, no network collisions, not even while I was saving the .bat, though at some times I had as much as four versions running simultaneously. A week later I'd usually kill the obsolete versions.

This is something you can do when you're tweaking the code, i.e. the versions are not that different, they operate on identical tables, and the old version actually works but you're just adding to it, and when you can provide smooth parallel operation of two versions at the same time. If you can't provide this level of development, well, it's too early to run production code anyway.