|
Any comments on SubVersion ?
http://subversion.tigris.org/
|
|
|
|
|
Subversion is good. I just use it as a single developer which probably doesn't test it in many ways that larger teams would, but I've been quite impressed. I've been trialing it for a little while, and I'm almost ready to swith from CVS. At the moment I use the SVN shell extensions. Subway (which will integrate subversion with VS.NET using the SCC API) will be good too. I have to use VSS @ work because it is "the standard".
|
|
|
|
|
We've had little or no problem with it. We're a small shop with windows as the client and Linux on our servers, and both the unix programmers and the window programmer (me) seem to like it. You need some comfort at the command line, though.
There's also not the visual integration with Visual Studio like VSS, but it sounds like subway might do that although we (I) use VC 6.0.
There's a visual tool called RapidSVN, but I haven't used it.
Perforce is another option that integrates with Visual Studio, but has a fee if you have more than one client, I think.
|
|
|
|
|
That's what I want to see, what do Microsoft use internally for version control. Can't believe they use VSS for the Windows code base 
Michael
'War is at best barbarism...Its glory is all moonshine. It is only those who have neither fired a shot nor heard the shrieks and groans of the wounded who cry aloud for blood, more vengeance, more desolation. War is hell.' - General William Sherman, 1879
|
|
|
|
|
Me too...
I am seeking...
For what?
Why did you ask me for what? I don't know!
|
|
|
|
|
I remember reading in aa artical on the developement of Windows NT that they wrote their own version control system.
|
|
|
|
|
The guys on the VS team said they use Perforce.
ed
Regulation is the substitution of error for chance.
|
|
|
|
|
Look this:
http://www.usenix.org/events/usenix-win2000/invitedtalks/lucovsky_html/sld024.htm
Rodrigo Strauss
|
|
|
|
|
|
I heard a rumour a while back that MS is working on a brand new tool.
I gather that VSS was a bought-in tool initially. And it's not really changed in ages.
Kevin
|
|
|
|
|
AFAIK, the initial versions of SourceSafe were made by this guy[^], owner of a small company named "One Tree Software".
Kant wrote:
Actually she replied back to me "You shouldn't fix the bug. You should kill it"
|
|
|
|
|
Interesting. I'd heard that rumour but that's the first time I've seen it confirmed.
Did you know the predecessor product to SourceSafe (Microsoft Delta) was also bought in?
Anna ![Rose | [Rose]](https://codeproject.global.ssl.fastly.net/script/Forums/Images/rose.gif)
Homepage | My life in tears
"Be yourself - not what others think you should be"
- Marcia Graesch
"Anna's just a sexy-looking lesbian tart"
- A friend, trying to wind me up. It didn't work.
Trouble with resource IDs? Try the Resource ID Organiser Visual C++ Add-In
|
|
|
|
|
Anna-Jayne Metcalfe wrote:
Interesting. I'd heard that rumour but that's the first time I've seen it confirmed.
Did you know the predecessor product to SourceSafe (Microsoft Delta) was also bought in?
OMG, who takes these decisions, anyway?
Kant wrote:
Actually she replied back to me "You shouldn't fix the bug. You should kill it"
|
|
|
|
|
Calling the Microsoft Visual Sourcesafe a source control tool is similiar to calling a notepad an "Integrated Source Code Editor".
VSS is rather comparable to a simple backup system than a source control utility. It is a very buggy, slow and unreliable backup system at that, and nobody's sources are safe in VSS database as it get's corrupted regularly and exposed for damage.
The worst of all is that it's not a real client-server architecture. Instead, each VSS "client" application is accessing the database on its own (via network share in a typical setup). That leaves the database out in the open and it can be wiped out using file manager from any unit accessing the database. If any of your machines will get infected with a virus it can destroy the database with ease, or worse it could actually alter the code in the database at will, without anybody noticing.
It also makes an interesting observation that there are no advances in the source control field from the Microsof's side. With all that dot net push and with talking about productivity, security and all VSS is still as buggy and unsecure as back in VS6.0 times.
<center> </center>
|
|
|
|
|
What other solution do you propose?
This software is very good!
|
|
|
|
|
There are *plenty* of alternatives. Some good, some bad. A few I can think of off the top of my head:
CVS
PVCS
ClearCase
It seems that from what's been posted here, VSS works fine for small projects and small numbers of programmers, but scales very poorly. I am somewhat surprised that MS doesn't offer a high-end version of VSS for serious programmers.
"When a man sits with a pretty girl for an hour, it seems like a minute. But let him sit on a hot stove for a minute and it's longer than any hour. That's relativity." - Albert Einstein
|
|
|
|
|
Unless you really hate yourself I wouldn't consider PVCS.
We use that at the moment and it actually makes SourceSafe look good.
It provides every exotic feature that you can think of, but it fails do the basic things correctly. When you do a fetch it doesn't check if you already have the current version of the file. So if you need only to update 2 files in a huge project you have to upload and rebuild the whole thing.
Also, only half works over a WAN.
Also, very buggy unintuitive client SW and just try and get them to fix any of their bugs.
|
|
|
|
|
Seconded. I evaluated PCVS (one of the other devs was very enthusiastic about it) and couldn't believe how counter-intuitive it was.
Stability notwithstanding, when a VSS admin (since 1996, scarily) doesn't feel confident using a souce code control product without going on a training course it may just be a little counter-intuitive...
Anna
Homepage | My life in tears
"Be yourself - not what others think you should be"
- Marcia Graesch
"Anna's just a sexy-looking lesbian tart"
- A friend, trying to wind me up. It didn't work.
Trouble with resource IDs? Try the Resource ID Organiser Visual C++ Add-In
|
|
|
|
|
Have you ever had any problem with a CVS server ?
If you had, you 'd never talk about it as a better alternative to VSS. It have the same (or about the same) problems... Thanks to some good "CVS clients plugin" for eclipse (I used it only on Java projects, VSS was used for any .net / C++ projects I ever worked on), we've messed up the files in the CVS repositroy directory and loosed almost a week of work (Yes, perhaps planning a backup once a week was not what you could have called secured, but...)
As far as I have seen, CVS (and obvioulsy PCVS which is even more difficult to use, lacking of any good tools) is not better than VSS, it's just full of differents design-mistakes. And I do appreciate the default behavior of VSS that requires you to check BEFORE doing any modification in your source code.
My true meaning is not to make use VSS or CVS or any other piece of software : that depends on your dev environment. But NO, CVS is not better than VSS, just different. And, in my opinoion, certainly not to better to be used on wide projects. VSS and CVS are good to use on 1 to 10 (perhaps 20...) peoples projects.
Michael CARBENAY
|
|
|
|
|
I agree with you, I have never seen such a piece of "  sh*tty " software.
Tomas
|
|
|
|
|
Well, maybe a bit of an overstatement, but none of the ones I've seen are convincing.
We use SourceSafe and are looking at CVS, but aren't entirely happy with either. SourceSafe doesn't handle Unicode text well, particularly UTF-8, and CVS - don't start me! I could wax lyrical on how unpleasant it and WinCVS are in usability terms, but our key objection is its default handling of binary files - there's nothing to stop two (or more) people developing different versions of the same file which then can't be merged.
Although there seem to be various hacky configuration options which might mitigate this a bit (we're still investigating these), surely we're not the only developers who have to deal with a mixture of ANSI, UTF-8 and binary files and expect sensible default handling of all three?
Gavin Greig
"Haw, you're no deid," girned Charon. "Get aff ma boat or ah'll report ye."
Matthew Fitt - The Hoose O Haivers: The Twelve Trauchles O Heracles.
|
|
|
|
|
Rational Clearcase - you can check in ANYTHING to it. It does not care.
We put documents, source files, bitmaps, resource files, etc. in five different written languages into ClearCase - it all seems to work just fine.
It has good merging, and developers can work independently in different branches on the same code base, and then merge together at the end. Merging can be a bit difficult if the sources diverge greatly, but for simple simultaneous enhancements and bug fixing, it is great.
I just mention it because everyone here seems to only talk about SS and CVS, I did not see any mention of ClearCase.
You can drive it from the command line or from its COM interface.
It integrates with Visual Studio IDE and the Windows Explorer.
C++/MFC/InstallShield since 1993
|
|
|
|
|
just to say cc is not ideal too (surely price)
the biggest problem for me is mentioned msdev integration (not all options comparing to other access) and terrible refresh problems using it into dynamic view ('source was changed outside editor' messages without reason or 'posponed' refreshes (after build end you want to run and is asks for build, till run-request never asks, next explicit build often makes nothing)
t!
|
|
|
|
|
 I can't believe anybody can like ClearCase. We had an office party after we got rid of it.
|
|
|
|
|
LOL!
At my new job none of the developers "trust" it. The build manager and pm's are constanly sending us e-mail to get use it.
I have only been there a month and have had to rebuild or drop my view twice due to corruption. I think it is as bad as VSS.
Hey don't worry, I can handle it. I took something. I can see things no one else can see. Why are you dressed like that?
- Jack Burton
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
