[AccessD] Source Code Control

Hi Jim,

And TeamServer uses VSS Server - Yes/No?

Shamil

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Jim Lawrence" <accessd at shaw.ca>
To: "'Access Developers discussion and problem solving'"
<accessd at databaseadvisors.com>
Sent: Thursday, January 19, 2006 3:11 PM
Subject: Re: [AccessD] Source Code Control


> Hi Shamil:
>
> MS uses TeamServer for all their projects.
>
> Jim
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com
> [mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of Shamil
> Salakhetdinov
> Sent: January 18, 2006 11:57 PM
> To: Access Developers discussion and problem solving
> Subject: Re: [AccessD] Source Code Control
>
> > I mean, honestly, it works for a little side project
> Josh,
>
> I guess MS uses VSS by themselves ...
>
> I did use VSS in a huge MSVC++ project of my colleague with thouzands of
> source files and a half of a hundred projects - it worked well, no
problems
> at all...
>
> I think most of the "horror stories" about VSS are in the past now.
>
> Yes, I liked SubVersion for the features you describe and because it's
open
> source...
>
> If there is no need in these SubVersion features then VSS looks good
enough
> and stable.
>
> Shamil
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Josh McFarlane" <darsant at gmail.com>
> To: "Access Developers discussion and problem solving"
> <accessd at databaseadvisors.com>
> Sent: Thursday, January 19, 2006 7:22 AM
> Subject: Re: [AccessD] Source Code Control
>
>
> > On 1/17/06, Josh McFarlane <darsant at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > I haven't used SourceSafe in Access personally, only C++ projects. I
> > > find it interesting that they've worked out code to diff Access DBs,
> > > but cannot make it compatible with Word for diffing.
> > >
> > > Granted, everything can be corrupt, but source-safe has a very very
> > > bad track record with corruption, even on simple things. I can't find
> > > the link now, but once I hit my work computer I'll post it.
> > >
> > > When it's all said and done, I still prefer a stability and safety
> > > over easy integration with Office / Visual Studio.
> >
> > OK, looked a little more into this, and supposedly if you run their
> > analyze.exe tool at least weekly, it will drastically reduce the
> > "fail" corruption rate (as it fixes the small corruptions before they
> > propigate).
> >
> > Some other interesting things that I hadn't heard before:
> >
> > Large binary files often had to have their version history cleared with
> 3.1
> >
> > File locks were frequently left behind and had to be manually removed.
> >
> > Then there's the dreaded \data\a\aaaaaaaa.a error message that
> > everyone seems to end up dealing with (For some reason, I swear there
> > was a KB article dealing with all the possible ways this could pop up,
> > but I can't find it)
> >
> > Also, if you delete a file, and then later recreate a file with the
> > same name, the previous file history is gone forever (You can't check
> > out previous complete builds anymore)
> >
> > I mean, honestly, it works for a little side project, but for anything
> > a business is depending on, I don't trust my weight on it when there's
> > free open-source products out there that do much much better in terms
> > of both reliability and interface.
> >
> > --
> > Josh McFarlane
> >
> > "Peace cannot be kept by force. It can only be achieved by
understanding."
> > -Albert Einstein
> > --