Team Foundation Server vs Visual Source Safe
-
VSS should be fine, it hasn't been updated in years anyway. Given that it may be a very long time until you have budget to upgrade again I would certainly go with TFS. In another few years VSS probably won't be supported or won't meet your needs. TFS is very extensible so it can keep pace with you. Also, there are feature that you will probably find very useful, if not now, certainly in the future.
I know the language. I've read a book. - _Madmatt
-
VS2010 will work with VSS. TFS does not come with Visual Studio, it is a separate server that VS connects to via the Team Explorer. As for the pros and cons of each, that would entail a long and, for some, hated debate. There is plenty of information available that describes TFS. Essentially though if you have a small team of developers, three or less, then VSS will probably work best for you. However, if you want to including continuous integration builds, work item tracking, etc. then TFS is the tool.
I know the language. I've read a book. - _Madmatt
Cruise Control works and nAnt work with VSS.
Need custom software developed? I do custom programming based primarily on MS tools with an emphasis on C# development and consulting. I also do Android Programming as I find it a refreshing break from the MS. "And they, since they Were not the one dead, turned to their affairs" -- Robert Frost
-
I'm not sure this is the right place to ask this question. We are currently using Visual Source Safe and VS 2002/2003. We are looking to upgrade to Visual Studio 2010. I need to know if Visual Source Safe will work with VS 2010 or do I need to move to Team Foundation Server? And does Team Foundation Server come with VS 2010? And what are the pros and cons of using one over the other? And before any one suggest a different version control software package, that is not an option. I work for a university and with our licensing agreement I have to go with one or the other. Thanks, Carolyn
If you can’t have fun at work, then why go to work?
I'd strongly urge looking at other (often free) alternatives like Subversion. Subversion has strong support in Windows - Tortoise SVN provides explorer shell integration and Ankh SVN provides Visual Studio integration.
-
I'd strongly urge looking at other (often free) alternatives like Subversion. Subversion has strong support in Windows - Tortoise SVN provides explorer shell integration and Ankh SVN provides Visual Studio integration.
I'll second the vote for SVN. My limited exposure to TFS is that it attempts to incorporate source control in the karma of the large team. If you only have a few developers, it's serious overkill. - am I wrong? Read about VSS' limitations. Sometimes they won't hurt you.
Charlie Gilley You're going to tell me what I want to know, or I'm going to beat you to death in your own house. "Where liberty dwells, there is my country." B. Franklin, 1783
-
I'm not sure this is the right place to ask this question. We are currently using Visual Source Safe and VS 2002/2003. We are looking to upgrade to Visual Studio 2010. I need to know if Visual Source Safe will work with VS 2010 or do I need to move to Team Foundation Server? And does Team Foundation Server come with VS 2010? And what are the pros and cons of using one over the other? And before any one suggest a different version control software package, that is not an option. I work for a university and with our licensing agreement I have to go with one or the other. Thanks, Carolyn
If you can’t have fun at work, then why go to work?
Hi, TFS comes with VS2010 when you buy an MSDN subscription (from Professional with MSDN upwards), which is a really good way of getting your hands on all this stuff... Look at the volume licensing though - far better value than retail! Have a look at the charts here to see what you get: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-gb/subscriptions/subscriptionschart.aspx[^] Cheers, Rob.
-
I'd strongly urge looking at other (often free) alternatives like Subversion. Subversion has strong support in Windows - Tortoise SVN provides explorer shell integration and Ankh SVN provides Visual Studio integration.
Perhaps you didn't read the OP closely enough, "And before any one suggest a different version control software package, that is not an option." Your answer is a useless waste of time.
I know the language. I've read a book. - _Madmatt
-
VSS should be fine, it hasn't been updated in years anyway. Given that it may be a very long time until you have budget to upgrade again I would certainly go with TFS. In another few years VSS probably won't be supported or won't meet your needs. TFS is very extensible so it can keep pace with you. Also, there are feature that you will probably find very useful, if not now, certainly in the future.
I know the language. I've read a book. - _Madmatt
Visual Source Safe 2005 will be out of mainstream support on 4/12/2011 Source Safe Product Lifecycle[^]
"It's like the sixties, but with less hope."
-
Perhaps you didn't read the OP closely enough, "And before any one suggest a different version control software package, that is not an option." Your answer is a useless waste of time.
I know the language. I've read a book. - _Madmatt
-
I'd strongly urge looking at other (often free) alternatives like Subversion. Subversion has strong support in Windows - Tortoise SVN provides explorer shell integration and Ankh SVN provides Visual Studio integration.
If you have the budget now, get TFS while you can. And make sure you get future maintenance in the recurring budget. TFS supports a full Process. Investigate how you can adapt existing processes to TFS or simply adopt one of Microsoft's supported processes. Subversion can always be tried at a later date. It is more of a straight version control. You will have to integrate/adapt your processes to work with Subversion. If you are at a University, you probably have a hodge podge of systems. You might end up deploying Subversion on some unix box.
-
VS2010 will work with VSS. TFS does not come with Visual Studio, it is a separate server that VS connects to via the Team Explorer. As for the pros and cons of each, that would entail a long and, for some, hated debate. There is plenty of information available that describes TFS. Essentially though if you have a small team of developers, three or less, then VSS will probably work best for you. However, if you want to including continuous integration builds, work item tracking, etc. then TFS is the tool.
I know the language. I've read a book. - _Madmatt
Get TFS. I agree it's overkill for small teams, but given your microsoft only constraint and the fact that VSS is slated to be obsolete in 2011, you might as well bite the bullet and get TFS. I admit, it's not the easiest beast to learn (especially coming from SVN), but if schedule 2 weeks for learning as part of the upgrade, you'll become a master.
-
I'm not sure this is the right place to ask this question. We are currently using Visual Source Safe and VS 2002/2003. We are looking to upgrade to Visual Studio 2010. I need to know if Visual Source Safe will work with VS 2010 or do I need to move to Team Foundation Server? And does Team Foundation Server come with VS 2010? And what are the pros and cons of using one over the other? And before any one suggest a different version control software package, that is not an option. I work for a university and with our licensing agreement I have to go with one or the other. Thanks, Carolyn
If you can’t have fun at work, then why go to work?
TFS also provides change control management with project templates supporting Agile development, and quite recently Scrum specifically. TFS requires SQL Server and to get the maximum benefit from TFS, especially to support change control, will require Analysis Services and Reporting Services, and if available, Sharepoint. TFS goes a long way to fully supporting ALM. We have recently moved our source control from Subversion to TFS, and as well as moving change control to TFS with our upgrade of our MSDN subscription to VS 2010. We were pleasantly surprised at the capability of TFS.
-
I'd strongly urge looking at other (often free) alternatives like Subversion. Subversion has strong support in Windows - Tortoise SVN provides explorer shell integration and Ankh SVN provides Visual Studio integration.
As he said, he needs to stick to MS solutions. FWIW, where I worked changed from VSS 6 to SVN, and SVN sucks. While I can use it, and have to, it is nowhere near as productive (i.e. less time consuming) as VSS2005. SVN seems to me to be an almost-there solution that was written for C programmers who each reside in their bunkers with nothing else to do but write code in vi or some other text editor. I'd recommend VSS2005 at a minimum, perhaps while implementing and learning TFS to replace it.
-
Perhaps you didn't read the OP closely enough, "And before any one suggest a different version control software package, that is not an option." Your answer is a useless waste of time.
I know the language. I've read a book. - _Madmatt
But SVN is free. I can't see how any kind of licensing agreement could forbid you from using free stuff.
-
But SVN is free. I can't see how any kind of licensing agreement could forbid you from using free stuff.
Free doesn't mean it won't cost. Some organizations don't allow these tools because of the maintenance and support headaches that come along with them, often a dedicated resource is maintained to support these "free" tools. Some don't allow open source because of security restrictions. Further still some organizations are locked into an agreement where by they get discounts on other products for using another from that vendor. Your comment is very naive. Free isn't always better or the answer to everything.
I know the language. I've read a book. - _Madmatt
-
Free doesn't mean it won't cost. Some organizations don't allow these tools because of the maintenance and support headaches that come along with them, often a dedicated resource is maintained to support these "free" tools. Some don't allow open source because of security restrictions. Further still some organizations are locked into an agreement where by they get discounts on other products for using another from that vendor. Your comment is very naive. Free isn't always better or the answer to everything.
I know the language. I've read a book. - _Madmatt
Your comment is a strawman. I never said it was better or the answer to everything. I am just suggesting that it is probably not against any license agreements to use SVN. And if it is, I would seriously reconsider said agreement. I don't know anything about the security restrictions at the OP's university. I do know that SVN is approved for use where I work, which has an extremely restrictive security policy (Government related). I thought your original flaming comment and a 1 vote was quite the over-reaction for what seemed to be a legitimate attempt to help. In the context of the OP's post (selective quoting notwithstanding), sugesting an open source, free alternative wasn't a "useless waste of time". I have used VSS and SVN. I like them both and find they have very similar features.
-
Your comment is a strawman. I never said it was better or the answer to everything. I am just suggesting that it is probably not against any license agreements to use SVN. And if it is, I would seriously reconsider said agreement. I don't know anything about the security restrictions at the OP's university. I do know that SVN is approved for use where I work, which has an extremely restrictive security policy (Government related). I thought your original flaming comment and a 1 vote was quite the over-reaction for what seemed to be a legitimate attempt to help. In the context of the OP's post (selective quoting notwithstanding), sugesting an open source, free alternative wasn't a "useless waste of time". I have used VSS and SVN. I like them both and find they have very similar features.
Rick Shaub wrote:
I am just suggesting that it is probably not against any license agreements to use SVN
Of course using open source is not against any license agreement, it would be illegal. However, vendors do push for exclusive contracts that prohibit the use of other tools. You again appear naive in relation to such matters.
Rick Shaub wrote:
I don't know anything about the security restrictions at the OP's university.
Then you really can't comment and a reference to your organization is an irrelevant attempt at self-importance.
Rick Shaub wrote:
sugesting an open source, free alternative wasn't a "useless waste of time".
When the OP expressly stated using another tool was out of the question, then yes, suggesting one is a waste of time. Since the response did not provide any useful information and did not comply with the OP's request is was a bad answer and the vote is justified. Thanks for playing. Run along now.
I know the language. I've read a book. - _Madmatt
-
I'm not sure this is the right place to ask this question. We are currently using Visual Source Safe and VS 2002/2003. We are looking to upgrade to Visual Studio 2010. I need to know if Visual Source Safe will work with VS 2010 or do I need to move to Team Foundation Server? And does Team Foundation Server come with VS 2010? And what are the pros and cons of using one over the other? And before any one suggest a different version control software package, that is not an option. I work for a university and with our licensing agreement I have to go with one or the other. Thanks, Carolyn
If you can’t have fun at work, then why go to work?
FYI... just in case you decide to use Source Safe 2005 with VS2010 you will need a hotfix: http://code.msdn.microsoft.com/KB976375[^]
-
Rick Shaub wrote:
I am just suggesting that it is probably not against any license agreements to use SVN
Of course using open source is not against any license agreement, it would be illegal. However, vendors do push for exclusive contracts that prohibit the use of other tools. You again appear naive in relation to such matters.
Rick Shaub wrote:
I don't know anything about the security restrictions at the OP's university.
Then you really can't comment and a reference to your organization is an irrelevant attempt at self-importance.
Rick Shaub wrote:
sugesting an open source, free alternative wasn't a "useless waste of time".
When the OP expressly stated using another tool was out of the question, then yes, suggesting one is a waste of time. Since the response did not provide any useful information and did not comply with the OP's request is was a bad answer and the vote is justified. Thanks for playing. Run along now.
I know the language. I've read a book. - _Madmatt
I know you're a "site supporter" and all, but as far as I know, the "insults not welcome" rule applies to everyone. BTW- I think the "self-importance" dig was a bit of projection.
-
I know you're a "site supporter" and all, but as far as I know, the "insults not welcome" rule applies to everyone. BTW- I think the "self-importance" dig was a bit of projection.
Insult? What insult? In addition to being naive you are also very thin skinned. The childish down-voting is not welcome here either.
I know the language. I've read a book. - _Madmatt
-
Insult? What insult? In addition to being naive you are also very thin skinned. The childish down-voting is not welcome here either.
I know the language. I've read a book. - _Madmatt
Mark Nischalke wrote: Insult? What insult? In addition to being naive you are also very thin skinned. This insult: "And before any one suggest a different version control software package, that is not an option." Your answer is a useless waste of time. Mark Nischalke wrote: The childish down-voting is not welcome here either. I think voting is welcome here. Read the rules.