|
Once again most probably a lack of my english. Seems I did not understand the question enough.
Sorry
modified 19-Jan-21 21:04pm.
|
|
|
|
|
You can use add-ons that work with SVN to help with that. That's the nature of OSS, it's all distributed. Whereas MS puts it all in a box and shrink wraps it for you.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
USB drive. 
|
|
|
|
|
I'm doing that too, it just feels a bit limited.
|
|
|
|
|
Jörgen, why not use TFS online (hosted at MS) for free? I've been using it for my personal projects and absolutely love it!
/ravi
|
|
|
|
|
Is it free for business too?
|
|
|
|
|
Yessir, for up to 5 users! 
/ravi
|
|
|
|
|
Damn, but good enough for testing actually.
|
|
|
|
|
Source control would depend on the project.
For a really large code base - Perforce.
For an open source project - Git (because of GitHub)
Most other cases - SVN.
As for the tracking system, I've tried a few and all are horrible: Jira, Bugzilla, Trac.
|
|
|
|
|
Moving from something ancient like CVS probably SVN. Much smaller learning curve than a distributed system.
Never used TFS so no comment.
TortoiseGIT is a clunky cluster elephant compared to TortoiseSVN. All my git work has been for Ruby so no comment on VS's git integration.
I've used mercurial for a few small personal projects, chosen mostly on the fact that whenever I read a git vs hg article I inevitably found myself in agreement with hg, but I haven't used the latter enough to make any judgments about largescale use. It's been long enough since I did the reading that I don't recall any specifics beyond GIT was all "MOAR POWAR!!!!!" while Hg tried to keep you from shooting yourself in the foot by accident (but if you really decided paying a doctor to amputate that toe was too expensive there was a way to do it).
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, waging all things in the balance of reason?
Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful?
--Zachris Topelius
Training a telescope on one’s own belly button will only reveal lint. You like that? You go right on staring at it. I prefer looking at galaxies.
-- Sarah Hoyt
modified 25-Nov-14 9:50am.
|
|
|
|
|
I believe you've been reading the same articles as me.
Before this post I were leaning towards Mercurial, but enough people have mentioned TFS that I will have to take a serious look at it. I'm having a soon former workmate that's been working with it that recommended against it for price/performance reasons or rather just price reasons.
|
|
|
|
|
VSS and Access
it worked in 1998, it can work today!
|
|
|
|
|
I don't have any memories of either of them working.
|
|
|
|
|
TFS for source control, and most likely TFS for work item and issue tracking, since it integrates seamlessly with source control.
/ravi
|
|
|
|
|
I use FogBugz for issue tracking and VisualSVN (on my own server) for source control
|
|
|
|
|
I believe that was the first FogBugz comment today, Are you happy with it? Any specific gotchas?
|
|
|
|
|
FogBugz - I love it, I love it, I love it!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Why is that obvious?
I read Albert Holguins rant higher up in the Lounge, and he doesn't seem to happy with it.
|
|
|
|
|
Well, Jorgen, git may be somewhat fiddly, but it unifies teams both locally and remotely; it can be used by a lone programmer all the way up to a very large team, in case you grow, and this team can mix and match remote and local workers.
By using configuration a build-master can be appointed as with other systems, and it works with various OS's, so your team can do cross-platform development seamlessly.
Also it's free and integrated into Visual Studio from 2012 up, available in 2008 and 2010 also, if that's where your team works.
|
|
|
|
|
I'm surprised git didn't come up earlier in this thread.
GIT is a basterd to learn. Haven't found any tool that spares you learning the command line, the Linux culture is strong in this - and grating. Change in mindset may be steep.
Yet it also allows a few workflows that feel like magic.
For me, the biggest feature is interactive rebase: allows you to commit frequently and "dirty", then reorganize and clean the history before publishing it to public.
Conceptually, many commands do not operate on verisons, but on changes between versions - such as cherry-pick and rebase to move changes from one branch to another.
git blame is great for those "where the eff does this line come from?" moments.
It does change your workflow in a way I would miss with another tool.
|
|
|
|
|
It's "GIT is a basterd to learn" vs "I need those extra functions?
|
|
|
|
|
What I tried to convey is that it's not just *extra functions* but that is has a fundamental (supposedly net-positive) influence on the whole development process, one that isn't easily captured in "X% increased productivity" (which also means evaluation is subjective, so yes, YMMV.)
Mercurial is probably mature enough now to be a viable alternative. I'd still recommend because - despite obvious drawbacks - it has become the de facto standard in a wide range of the dev world.
|
|
|
|
|
SourceTree by Atlassian makes git much more approachable for windows users.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
