> > Oliver Pajonk wrote:
> > I think this is really interesting: why would someone move from a
stable
> > RCS to a beta version of something that has been known as "visual
> > source unsafe" for quite some time :-)
>
> Helge Jensen wrote:
> Perhaps for the same reasons someone moved from the stable CVS to beta
> subversion ;)
LOL - a group from our company went to Microsoft for a meeting and they
asked us what we used for source control and (at the time) we were using
VSS and they laughed at us! That specific team inside Microsoft was
using a rebranded, renamed version of Perforce at the time and they
thought we were dumb for using VSS. Our company currently uses both VSS
and SVN and SVN mauls VSS in so many ways that the whole company is
moving over to SVN group by group. The teams that use VSS have one
repository for each "branch" and they have to check in bug fixes to
three or four different VSS databases every single time they check in a
bugfix. It is ridiculous. I have SVN automatically detecting changes
in branches to decide which branches to build, automatically merging
changes into the trunk, etc.
Also, an employee who used to work at Microsoft came to work for us and
I was ranting and raving about how VSS kept corrupting its own pants
every few days and the Microsoft guy basically said to me: (no lie)
"Databases just get corrupted. There's nothing you can do about it,
just run analyze again." Wow.
Sorry I hijacked the thread and didn't end up being useful in finding an
SVN --> VSS conversion tool, but years of VSS torture and agony combined
with Microsoft themselves not even using it and mocking us for doing so
compelled me to post something here. I had no control of my fingers.
My apologies. Maybe XCOPY will work? ;)
Robert
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Tue Aug 23 18:21:22 2005