Hallo Wilhelm,
Richard wrote:
For lazy people like myself, the link to that report is:
http://quality.runrev.com/qacenter/show_bug.cgi?id=2217
The full sentence in which RunRev's Oliver Kenyon suggested the
need for an engine change is worth noting:
To fix the issue, we will need to
From: Klaus on-rev kl...@major.on-rev.com :
I can add as many checkboxes as you like :-) , but what exactly should
this one be good for?
This property cREVKeepDevelopmentProperties has no meaning in MC,
but maybe I am misunderstanding you?
Klaus,
It could have meaning for us in the
Hi Wilhelm,
From: Klaus on-rev kl...@major.on-rev.com :
I can add as many checkboxes as you like :-) , but what exactly
should this one be good for?
This property cREVKeepDevelopmentProperties has no meaning in
MC, but maybe I am misunderstanding you?
Klaus,
It could have meaning
Klaus wrote:
Still unsure what RevStandaloneSetting has got ot do with MC?
Stack RevStandaloneSettings with its substack RevSaveAsStandalone of the
Rev IDE is the equivalent
(and something more) of our Metacard Standalone Builder.
I tried to explain in my last post how Oliver Kenyon's
Hallo Wilhelm,
Klaus wrote:
Still unsure what RevStandaloneSetting has got ot do with MC?
Stack RevStandaloneSettings with its substack
RevSaveAsStandalone of the Rev IDE is the equivalent
(and something more) of our Metacard Standalone Builder.
I tried to explain in my last post how
Wilhelm Sanke wrote:
Unless, of course, the whole thing will be resolved by the Rev team in a
different way other than Oliver's workaround.
It might be a good idea to wait and see what happens before we put a lot
of work into revising the MC IDE. RR version 4 is still changing.
--
