Renamed project to SIL.Windows.Forms.Archiving

[josephmyers]

This change is 

[tombogle]

Palaso.sln line 30 at r1 (raw file):

Previously, tombogle (Tom Bogle) wrote…

Now I'm wondering if we should actually be trying to split this stuff into Forms vs. non-Forms DLLs. None of the unit tests depend on WinForms, so all the classes they are testing could be in a non-Forms dependent DLL. I'm not sure if they do anything useful enough on their own to warrant this though.

Looking at the code, the ArchivingDlg classes (abstract base and two concrete implementations) are the only things that really need to depend on WinForms. The models do, but only minimally and in a way they really shouldn't. If we were to fix those design issues, then those models could be used to back a non WinForms implementation.

[josephmyers]

@tombogle, any chance we'll see progress here this week or next?

[tombogle]

Not sure when I'll be able to get to this.

[josephmyers]

I discovered today that SIL.Media is a WinForms project. So a bit more to come on this

[megahirt]

I discovered today that SIL.Media is a WinForms project. So a bit more to come on this

@josephmyers we can rename SIL.Media in a separate PR.