<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-15">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.6000.16850" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY style="MARGIN: 4px 4px 1px; FONT: 10pt Tahoma">
<DIV>From the discussion, it seems to me that we may be mixing two different things. One is how to deal with evolution of CM3 itself where you may need older variant to build newer variant. Using Olaf's "pool" terminology, each variant (version) would be in a different pool I suppose. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>The other concept is that of maintaining one or more "public pools" for use by multiple developers--perhaps aligning pools on project boundaries--i.e. developers on Project A get access to pools A1, A2, ... while developers on Project B get access to pools B1, B2, ... or some such. Plus, also having multiple "private pools" for use by individual developers. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Not sure I'm understanding exactly what is being proposed, so I welcome you to set me straight.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><STRONG><U>Question</U></STRONG>: Have you used CM3IDE (the old Reactor) and observed how it allows for one "public pool" and multiple "private pools"? It also allows each developer's list of "private pools" to be independent. That is, Developer A's list of "private pools" could be different from Developer B's list. In CM3IDE the term it uses for "pool" is "package root". Each developer is free to adjust his/her list of package roots at any time, though changing the public package root would not make sense unless you had multiple CM3 installations from which to choose.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Perhaps my understanding of what is meant by "pool" needs clarification?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Regards,</DIV>
<DIV>Randy Coleburn</DIV></BODY></HTML>