Jonathan Gilligan wrote: Subversion is in the early alpha-testing stages. Would you trust your production code to a version-control system that's only in alpha? Well... not really ;) I would give it a more thorough look and test-drive before using it for anything remotely serious. Speaking for Subversion is the fact that they claim to be self-hosting, and never having lost any data... Cheers Michael.

Here's a link http://developers.slashdot.org/developers/02/07/15/219203.shtml?tid=156[^] to a bunch of people discussion the pros'n'cons of various version control systems. Not so much a review, but some people discussing realworld experiences. Personally i would go for Perforce, which is free to use for 2 clients (but somewhat pricy when you need a license for more people). Perforce has IDE-integration, works with multiple codelines (release/development branches), is server-based (and has atomic commits), jobs/changelists for feature/bug-tracking, ... Also Subversion >could be< worth looking into (but I havent decided if I like the repository-wide revision numbering... And I really like the job/changelist stuff from Perforce...) Oh! And Source(Un)Safe really sucks - corrupting the repository files on a regular basis. Cheers Michael

Hey, Rumours have it that Microsoft internally is using Perforce for version control of the Windows sources... MS is supposedly using an adapted version of Perforce, which is nicknamed Source Depot. Now, >if< the rumours are right, it should be no trouble working on large projects, unless of course your projects are significantly larger than the windows codebase ;-) I have not used Perforce myself, but have only heard and read good stuff about it... I've been looking out for a SourceSafe replacement also. Currently my list of things to evaluate when there is 48 hours in a day is: - Perforce (They have a free trial scheme) - FreeCVS - CVS

I've used automated module and integration testing for some time now, and my experience is that it both cuts initial development time, testing AND subsequent making of the next versions of the product. Granted there is some time spent writing the testcases, but this time saved by spending less time looking for bugs already during intial development. We do a lot of refactoring of our code (constant improvement ?!?), and run the testsuite several times a day. In doing this we catch newly introduced errors close to the point in time they have been introduced, and they are therefore a lot easier to locate and squash. Of course the tests do not catch everything, and when discovering a un-detected bug, we write a testcase which catch the error befor efixing the bug. This way the testsuite constantly get better and better. There is no way that I would go back to developing without an automated testing system. PERIOD!