Return-Path: <John.Harrison-request@cl.cam.ac.uk>
Delivery-Date: 
Received: from leopard.cs.byu.edu (no rfc931) by swan.cl.cam.ac.uk 
          with SMTP (PP-6.5) outside ac.uk; Tue, 24 May 1994 13:50:27 +0100
Received: by leopard.cs.byu.edu (1.37.109.8/16.2) id AA02826;
          Tue, 24 May 1994 06:47:46 -0600
Sender: hol2000-request@lal.cs.byu.edu
Errors-To: hol2000-request@lal.cs.byu.edu
Precedence: bulk
Received: from tuminfo2.informatik.tu-muenchen.de by leopard.cs.byu.edu 
          with SMTP (1.37.109.8/16.2) id AA02817;
          Tue, 24 May 1994 06:47:12 -0600
Received: from sunbroy14.informatik.tu-muenchen.de ([131.159.0.114]) 
          by tuminfo2.informatik.tu-muenchen.de with SMTP id <326454>;
          Tue, 24 May 1994 14:47:01 +0200
Received: by sunbroy14.informatik.tu-muenchen.de id <8067>;
          Tue, 24 May 1994 14:46:31 +0200
From: Konrad Slind <slind@informatik.tu-muenchen.de>
To: jug@itd.dsto.gov.au
Cc: hol2000@leopard.cs.byu.edu
In-Reply-To: <9405240428.AA05303@itd0.dsto.gov.au> (message from Jim Grundy on Tue, 24 May 1994 06:28:48 +0200)
Subject: Re: RCS
Message-Id: <94May24.144631met_dst.8067@sunbroy14.informatik.tu-muenchen.de>
Date: Tue, 24 May 1994 14:46:25 +0200


> whatever we do with hol2000 we should maintain the source code with
> some form of revision control software like RCS. :-)

In extant source code control systems can a person "check out" code by
ftp? One significant factor in HOL development, at least for hol90, is
that there is a lot of development going on in different places.

Konrad.