|
Yes, I do too. It's surprisingly easy and I managed to set up Subversion against a shared folder on my NAS in under half an hour.
Even when there's just one of you, it's good to be able to back a whole raft of changes out when you realised you didn't do something properly!
Regards,
Rob Philpott.
|
|
|
|
|
And it is soooo sllooooowwwww!
Apparently, many in the team found the Git/GitHub learning curve to be too difficult so we moved to TFS. It takes ages to do things, the Visual Studio integration crashes VS, and if there are network issues then it becomes very difficult to do any work.
I use GitHub for personal projects.
|
|
|
|
|
Why did you drop Git for TFS? For technical/organisational/other reasons?
Cheers
Andi
|
|
|
|
|
Political, mostly. People didn't like it or were not willing to learn it, even with GitHub for Windows which hand holds you through most things that you'd want.
Also, I'm told that the CVs we were getting in for developers overwhelmingly had TFS experience and very little Git/GitHub (which at the moment is the most common source control according to this poll) and we are desperate to attract good developers, so anything to make the transition easier...
|
|
|
|
|
I hate it when people do something simply because they don't want to learn something else... not the right reason for a change like that.  
|
|
|
|
|
We switched from Subversion to TFS earlier this year and I haven't had any trouble with it (other than that the database keeps crashing). However, one of the issues we had earlier on was "slowness" -- it turned out that TFS was hitting Active Directory (this is a very large company) to get a list of users whenever we tried to assign a developer, etc. We had a TFS guru come in and alter the configuration so TFS would only pull in only the relevent users.
As to Visual Studio crashing... I haven't had that problem either -- I keep an instance of VS open for only doing TFS work and keep that separate from "real work".
|
|
|
|
|
See http://aegis.sf.net
SCM, continuous integration and regression testing management rolled into one.
Of course, its not for the faint hearted, so tend to use SVN when interacting with other, or Git if the others insist.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Seems like Perforce and other commercial products are absent from the poll.
|
|
|
|
|
We are a very small outfit of two. After losing directories of a solution while trying to use Visual SourceSafe but neglecting to specifically add every new subdirectory into it, and reading horror stories of how SourceSafe was adapted for Team Server, I simply zip the entire solution directory into a file, add the date and a letter onto it and sometimes a short description of the change, and copy it to our server and my development computer, both of which are backed up every day in different ways. I do this every time I make a programming change. Every once in a while, I clean out some intervening old versions to save disk space. This method is simple, reliable, easy to understand, no special tools required. Occasionally, I play with Git, because some code I am interested in is in GitHub, but as long as there is a learning or forgetting curve, I am not using it for production.
|
|
|
|
|
You really need to suck up the learning curve and use an actual source control solution. After the learning curve, you'll be glad you did. You'll realize that there are a lot of benefits to it other than just keeping a history of everything. Such as, being able to compare versions easily, being able to roll back changes, manage source branches, create tags for documentation (and long term supportability since you'll have the source code at any version easily accessible).
When I first started using SVN, it was a headache, but now.. I can't imagine what I'd do on a serious project without it.
|
|
|
|
|
None of that really matters.
|
|
|
|
|
That's obviously your opinion... Millions of source control users would likely beg to differ.
|
|
|
|
|
Albert Holguin wrote: Such as, being able to compare versions easily
You can do it with many other tools as well
Albert Holguin wrote: being able to roll back changes
Unzip other day and copy the function you want to roll back
Albert Holguin wrote: create tags for documentation
Correctly commented code needs not so much documentation
Albert Holguin wrote: long term supportability since you'll have the source code at any version easily accessible
Might be, but it is also easier to mess up that changing something in the configuration or making major editions, than with the other system.
Albert Holguin wrote:
That's obviously your opinion...
Exactly, as the other message was your opinion.
Albert Holguin wrote: Millions of source control users would likely beg to differ.
I have been always proud about not being part of the "major part". So that is not a valid argument for me. If all people jump from a bridge... would you jump as well?
M.D.V. 
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
I agree with you.
Quoting my own answer to other message above:
When I work on a project I am used to make at least 1 backup a day (there are days with several backups). The name of the backup is like:
ProjectName_BackupTimestamp_ChangesDescriptionSinceLastBackup(_Offline)
[/quote]
When I end the project and customer is happy with the result (what means certain stability in the code), then I clean up, leaving the 3 or 4 last important ones.
- Backups that are just a continuation of a previous day... deleted
- Backups that are full solutions but then specifications were changed or test functions being rejected by "I don't like it"... to a special folder, code can be useful for future projects. Changing name to something more descriptive of what is interesant inside it
M.D.V.
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
I use git primarily, but we're moving to TFS because we'd rather use the bronze medalist, I guess.
Sigh.
Anyway, since some of our stuff is in TFS and some hasn't converted yet, I use both of those.
|
|
|
|
|
...because all the projects I'm working on for my clients and personally in Ruby on Rails and hosted by Heroku use Git. 
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
sadly?
if you did not have your clients, which source control system would you use - if any?
|
|
|
|
|
Samuel Pearce wrote: which source control system would you use - if any?
I've used source control since the days of DOS, and for the last 5 years have been using SVN, which I still use for some personal projects, but most of my work, personal or for clients, now requires Git. Though, I believe Heroku supports SVN as well, but if I want to publish any gems for Ruby on Rails, I basically have to use GitHub.
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
Why there is no such category? 
|
|
|
|
|
Because they're marginal as you can see. I also use this marginal system - Hg.
|
|
|
|
|
"A narrowed down follow up "
|
|
|
|
|
Well... CVS sucks...   ...and well, it's not being developed anymore, and hasn't been for quite a while now (superseded by other options)...
...but Mercurial is widely popular, I'm surprised it's not on there...
|
|
|
|
|
I work for a big organization and not all our departments are using the same tool sets.
Internally we're using CVS but our external (visible to users external to the company) versioning system is subversion. We have different branches in different countries and even here there are differences. For my one project (working with users external to the country I live in but internal to the company) I'm working on we use rational ClearCase.
"Program testing can be used to show the presence of bugs, but never to show their absence."
<< please vote!! >>
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
