>I think betting the business on VSS is a way worse proposition!
>Having just had a major SourceSafe data hiccup^H^H^H^H^H^H
>corruption, we now have the mandate to move us off of SourceSafe
>by end-of-year (for source code at least).
No argument from me. SourceSafe is a big maintenance problem.
There are ways to keep VSS working, use atleast 6.0c, analyze frequently,
keep each DB's size down <2GB, avoid the commands that are documented
to corrupt the DB's.
I'm with you, I cannot recommend SourceSafe.
But we have 64 active DB's and tools built on top. Getting off is not going
to be easy for us.
> > 3. Can you build tools on top of its API's? Answer today: No. We need docs
> > of the python API to SVN and we need examples.
>
>Agreed in an ideal world, but as of Friday, I didn't know ANY
>Python and hadn't run anything beyond the most trivial example
>usages of svn. It's not that hard to figure out from the examples
>which are there, even though there could be more.
>
> > We have a SCM built in Python on top of SourceSafe that allows to do
> > complete engineering
>
>Admittedly I don't know the extent of your scripting of VSS now,
>but if you managed to figure that all out from the VSS documentation
>and quirky command line, you can do the same with svn.
The VSS API has reasonable docs in MSDN and almost always does
what they say. The API size is a lot smaller then SVN's that make getting
going easy. I fear that I'm going to have to invest a large amount of time to
get my head around the SVN API.
I'm off now to find the C API docs that Ben refers to and see if that helps.
>--Jim
Barry
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Wed Sep 10 23:55:08 2003