Source Code Control
in [Embedded]
|
From: Steve at fivetrees on 7 Nov 2006 14:32 "toby" <toby(a)telegraphics.com.au> wrote in message news:1162913592.709382.186890(a)e3g2000cwe.googlegroups.com... > Tom Lucas wrote: >> "toby" <toby(a)telegraphics.com.au> wrote in message >> >> > - atomic commits (incl renaming), unlike CVS >> >> I'm not entirely sure what that is. Does it mean you can rename a file >> in a project without having to roll the build number of the whole >> project? > > Every change to a Subversion repository increments the revision number. > CVS does not support rename operations at all; Svn implements renames > (on directories or files) as a history-preserving copy plus a delete of > the original object, wrapped in a transaction. CVS cannot commit a > group of changes in a single revision (transaction). > > Atomic commits allow you to group related or interdependent changes and > thereby aid consistency (e.g. buildability) of your code base at any > moment in time. Atomic commits also mean that the entire commit operation runs, or none of it. In other words, something like a network glitch won't wind up with a broken repository. Subversion gets my vote too. I'm in the process of converting a SourceSafe environment to Subversion (using the svnserve stand-alone server, rather than the web DAV version), and it's going fine. Everyone in the dept likes Subversion with TortoiseSVN, and we've noticed immediate benefits (no locked files, better log history viewing, etc etc). Tom, are you in the UK? If so I'd be happy to talk on the phone. Maybe I can help... We're using an OpenBSD server for the repo store (on a RAID array, backed-up nightly), and it was trivially easy. I imagine a Windows installation would be similarly easy, but I've no experience there... Steve http://www.fivetrees.com
From: Tauno Voipio on 7 Nov 2006 14:38 toby wrote: > Tom Lucas wrote: > >>In the past our source code control has been based largely around CD >>backups and individual's memories of why a change was made and where the >>source is stored. ... >>What method/package would people recommend? I've read through the >>"Alternatives to Visual Source Safe" thread from July and people there >>seemed to advocate CVS/SVN and PVCS. Noone seems to like VSS. >> >>I would need something that would run on Windows, ... >> >>What do you reckon? > > > I've been using Subversion for a few years. Another vote for Subversion. If you need a graphic front-end for it, try eSVN, <http://esvn.umputun.com/>. It is multi-platform. I'm running it under Mac OSX and Linux. AFAIK, the Windows client also works. -- Tauno Voipio tauno voipio (at) iki fi
From: toby on 7 Nov 2006 15:23 Tauno Voipio wrote: > toby wrote: > > Tom Lucas wrote: > > > >>In the past our source code control has been based largely around CD > >>backups and individual's memories of why a change was made and where the > >>source is stored. ... > >>What method/package would people recommend? I've read through the > >>"Alternatives to Visual Source Safe" thread from July and people there > >>seemed to advocate CVS/SVN and PVCS. Noone seems to like VSS. > >> > >>I would need something that would run on Windows, ... > >> > >>What do you reckon? > > > > > > I've been using Subversion for a few years. > > Another vote for Subversion. > > If you need a graphic front-end for it, try eSVN, > <http://esvn.umputun.com/>. It is multi-platform. > I'm running it under Mac OSX and Linux. Another OS X client I recently heard about: http://zigzig.com/ > AFAIK, the > Windows client also works. > > -- > > Tauno Voipio > tauno voipio (at) iki fi
From: Henrik [6650] on 7 Nov 2006 16:10 "toby" <toby(a)telegraphics.com.au> skrev i en meddelelse news:1162909264.750932.91420(a)f16g2000cwb.googlegroups.com... [Snip lots of good comments about other systems] > As for VSS... the definitive summary is: "Visual SourceSafe? It would > be safer to print out all your code, run it through a shredder, and set > it on fire." > (via > http://jeremycoenen.com/blog/index.php/archive/subversion-just-plain-rocks/ > ) I sit here wondering if all this Anti VSS propaganda out there is due to a general disliking of Microsoft, or does anybody actually have any bad experiences with Visual Sourcesafe? It seems that nobody (it is not only in this newsgroup) has anything nice to say about the product, although no specifics are listed. Just those "Print your code and set your hair on fire" things. I do not ask this to start a war over which is better or if Microsoft is truly pure concentrated evil. I have had no say in the decision to use VSS where i work and I cannot say that I love Microsoft or the way they do business. But I have been using VSS for about 4 years and have never experienced any kinds of trouble. I recently moved to the new version. Also without any problems. But all this fuss about MSVSS makes me wonder what is going on.... I would certainly not sleep very good at all if I knew about major blow-up scenarios a la "VSS ate all my code and kicked my dog" or things like that. I have never used anything else but VSS, so I cannot say I have a lot of experience, but I am always eager to learn and hear other opinions. So please, friends, throw in your horror/success stories. Thanking you all in advance. Henrik
From: Grant Edwards on 7 Nov 2006 16:25
On 2006-11-07, Henrik [6650] <henrik6650(a)ofir.dk> wrote: > I sit here wondering if all this Anti VSS propaganda out there is due to a > general disliking of Microsoft, or does anybody actually have any bad > experiences with Visual Sourcesafe? Sure. At one employer we lost files and ended up with corrupt databases on multiple occasions. Since we weren't running the latest version, no support was available from the vendor. The portion of that project that I worked on personally was under RCS -- which never a single problem. At another employer, the VSS database repeated got "corrupted". Each time it happened, the whole thing had to be shut down and fixed in a weekend-long process. A number of files and revisions were lost. One of those companies has ditched VSS completely, and the other is in the process of changing over to SVN. There's a huge, basic flaw in VSS's design. It's a single, monolythic, database file with no centralized server or control. All of the clients bang away individually at the database file. If one client glitches the whole thing crumples to the ground like a house of cards. -- Grant Edwards grante Yow! ... The waitress's at UNIFORM sheds TARTAR SAUCE visi.com like an 8" by 10" GLOSSY... |