I did *not* say that other tools could do this better. I *only* provided a *fair and unpoluted* range of answers. Developers (or technical people, in general actiually) tend to jump to technical issues right away, yet often fail to look at the problem from a global, unpoluted viewpoint. I tried to answer the questions about what we need and what we want, about what our current problems were, from an unbiased point. I tried to ignore any thing like "is it there, is it technically possible, or does Foo do this better then Bar". I tried to first get that top level idea right: answer to the question "what do we need an why" once, only after we truly know what we need, can we look which tools fit into that need best. Its what designers (technical designers, engineers, not webdesigners or graphical designers!) call "top-down approach", or "methodological approach", or even "morphological design"). It is the methodology used by NASA to design a rocket, by developers of nuclear plants and even by developers of a ballpointpen. Ber