SourceSafe has been a life saver for me.  It is easy to use, easy to
maintain and makes recovery of lost programs easy if used correctly.  The
NIMDA virus took out my main development machine.  Had it not been for
sourcesafe I would have lost several hundred hours of development time.
Instead I only lost 2 programs and about 2 days work.  That was my fault as
well for not updating daily as I should have been.

I've used Object Cycle as well and it was constantly getting corrupt.  It
got to the point where I stopped using it.  SourceSafe has not let me down
in 2 years.

Just my personal opinion on SourceSafe though.  I have heard bad things
about it as well, I just haven't seen any of them.

Thanks

Crane Whitehead
Programmer / Analyst
cwhitehead@h...
xxx.xxx.xxxx
 
Healthaxis
Computing and Network services
http://www.healthaxisasg.com


 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Randy Cornish [mailto:rlcornish@c...] 
Sent:	Thursday, January 24, 2002 6:58 PM
Subject:	Re: Version Control Systems

I have used SourceSafe at three different sites on 8 different projects 
over a span of 7 years, and for some reason, I've not experienced the 
problems mentioned.  I agree that SourceSafe is a tempermental product 
that would be better served as a SQL-based product (SQL Server tables?) 
versus a file-based product, but it does the job.  SourceSafe is NOT a 
revenue stream for Microsoft - it is an addin.  But, used properly, it 
can be stable - and it supports OLE Automation control from VB code - 
very useful in certain situations.

I must also say that I have not experienced the problems with the VB 
IDE "integration" that others have.  In fact, it has been MUCH easier to 
use than the "checkout", change, "checkin" model.  The secret is to "get 
it, do your thing, and get out".

I suspect the biggest problems with SourceSafe are:
   *  It is susceptable to a poor administrator (not doing the repairs
      and the ssadmin properly) - no guardrails.
   *  Documentation on admin tasks is weak.
   *  It is susceptable to abuse by developers.  You can shortcut 
      "best practices" and do things that overwrite others code, 
      and manually override the safeguards (i.e. working on an 
      "offline" copy and checking it in after a manual, human
      "differences" review - again, few guardrails.

FWIW,
R

> I am looking for comments (good and bad) about version control systems 
that
> anyone has had experience with?  We have been trialling a free one 
(FreeVCS)
> but have found it to have a few flaws, and so are looking for something 
more
> robust.  I have heard bad reports about SourceSafe.  Anyone care to 
comment?