Claudio

> Even if it sounds redundant or ugly, I prefer fool-proof and
> weak-memory-proof names (when and where did I get this version from?). So I
> think I can tolerate those names because they make life easier specially if
> I have a customer at the phone shouting that the engine crashed and need to
> know if I might have fixed already the thing in the source code so the next
> public build won't behave so badly. Although I'm speaking from FB
> perspective, I think the same can be applied to IB open edition.

Every program I put into the field has the version number in the name, even my
homebrew versions of IBObjects, FastReport etc. It is a pain because Builder 5
does not allow you to change packages easily, but I have a paper method that
allows me to edit the project before re-opening. I can then switch back to a
particular build situation and run with that set of libraries. I then just keep
a log of which versions are in use with a build. This even includes which
version of IB/FB, althogh at present I am only using FB0.9.4 in the field, as
far as I am concerned it is the only version that actually works, and I have
5.6 licences for sites that are not worth the hard disk space they are stored
on. So I am awating FB1 so that customers do not see 'Test' all the time.
GDS32.DLL really needs some sort of control in the same way - just overwriting
a perfectly stable copy with a buggy one is not acceptable ( I'm talking 5.1 -
5.5 - 5.6 here <g> ) All my 'communications hubs' talk to one another, but they
are all different program names, so why not the same with gds32 ?

--
Lester Caine
-----------------------------
L.S.Caine Electronic Services