|
yes to this.
although so far my last clever thing is holding up.
When I was growin' up, I was the smartest kid I knew. Maybe that was just because I didn't know that many kids. All I know is now I feel the opposite.
|
|
|
|
|
So, I wind up at a decision point which has had me stymied for ten years on one of my personal projects.
Waaaay back in 2009 I was between projects and I decided that a good exercise for keeping my skillz fresh was to finally develop a Code Management System similar to OpenVMS' CMS (just because).
The core of the code (and the SQL database repository) was working within a week and after a couple of months I had a Command-Line front-end client nearly feature-complete.
Then I was at an impasse...
I had planned on having SHOW and LIST commands -- similar to those on OpenVMS' User Authorization Facility (UAF).
If you're familiar with UAF you may have realized that SHOW and LIST are essentially redundant -- the only difference being their default options.
So, while working on my version of CMS did I really want to implement two redundant features? It's been TEN YEARS(!) and I still don't know.
So this week… I decided, "Hey, I can make a really really simple Code Version repository in XML!"... and now I have most of the (few) features working... and I need to decide whether or not I need both SHOW and LIST !
![Elephant | [mastadon]](https://codeproject.global.ssl.fastly.net/script/Forums/Images/elephant.gif)
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'm a longtime fan of TFS. At home I still have some older projects in TFS and working with it is pretty simple.
At work we use SCM which I've come the loath.
Lately at home when I try to add a solution to source control VS prompts me to create a Git repo even though in Tools=>Options I've selected TFS.
I've heard horror stories about Git and I really dont want to use it but VS wont allow me to use anything else.
Anyone else seeing this? Is this some known issue? Any info would be helpful
If it's not broken, fix it until it is.
Everything makes sense in someone's mind.
Ya can't fix stupid.
|
|
|
|
|
GIT is evil.
GIT is everything that is wrong in this world.
GIT for simple things is OK (clone, commit, push, pull).
As soon as something goes wrong, you will scream in pain.
seriously, it is OK, it is just too big and offers way too many different ways of doing more or less the same things.
You need to figure out one workflow and keep it.
Have a look at the last few posts on The Old New Thing to see what I mean.
I'd rather be phishing!
|
|
|
|
|
We are using GIT but have disabled GIT functionality in Visual Studio a long time ago as we found it too unreliable / not supporting all functionality.
So my advice is to use an external Git tool, or if you are a die hard the GIT command line.
https://www.slant.co/topics/2089/~best-git-clients-for-windows[^]
I don't think GIT is horrible, it might seem complex at first, but in comparison with Subversion it's much more reliable.
modified 11-May-19 10:02am.
|
|
|
|
|
Kevin Marois wrote: I've heard horror stories about Git
I've heard and told horror stories about TFS (or TFVC to be precise).
I used to do the same about Git when I first started using it.
SVN was da bomb!
Now I've been using Git for a while and I'd never want to go back to SVN.
It's all a matter of knowing the tools at your disposal and getting used to them.
I've found Git support in Visual Studio a bit lacking though, so I'm using SourceTree (by Atlassian) myself.
I'm finding myself using Git in VS more often though, so perhaps I'll switch to using Git with Visual Studio 2019.
|
|
|
|
|
I mostly agree, the only thing I use VS's built in git for is history/blame on single files.
The main difference is that only procrastination stands between me and dumping SourceTree
Atlasian took so long after defacto killing SourceTree 2.x by declining to patch security vulnerabilities to fix all the problems that kept 3.x from being as capable as the old version that I've lost all faith in them being able to deliver an acceptable quality product long term even though they've finally worked out all of the major bugs.
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, weighing all things in the balance of reason?
Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful?
--Zachris Topelius
Training a telescope on one’s own belly button will only reveal lint. You like that? You go right on staring at it. I prefer looking at galaxies.
-- Sarah Hoyt
|
|
|
|
|
Git's fine and the branching works well. Use it with Sourcetree and read Atlassian's documentation and you shouldn't have hassles.
|
|
|
|
|
we use VS 2017 with TFS at work. If you can't get TFS to work with VS, then there is something wrong on your side of the fence, and not with MS or VS. Just saying... 
You do NOT have to use Git with VS.
|
|
|
|
|
Well like I said, I select the TFS option in Tools=>Options, and when I go to add to source control, VS prompts me to create a Git repo. So no, it's not anything I'm doing. I didn't install or ask for Git. This smells like something MS would do - force Got on me.
If it's not broken, fix it until it is.
Everything makes sense in someone's mind.
Ya can't fix stupid.
|
|
|
|
|
Have you tried View -> Team Explorer (or Ctrl-* - Ctrl-M) -> click on 'Manage Connections' and add your TFS server?
noop()
|
|
|
|
|
I liked SourceSafe.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013
|
|
|
|
|
Okay. I'm figuring at least a 65% probability you're "taking the piss" as our friends Down Under would say, but I'm going to respond anyway.
My group is a long-time SourceSafe user. We have over a dozen 'data bases'. We run nightly integrity checks and backups. We have never had an unrecoverable failure in our source control due to SourceSafe. I'll grant you there are a lot of things that it doesn't support, but for us it works. I'll also admit we've written some special tools to improve our workflow and to automate our build process.
There was a period about four years ago when we planned to modernize and switch to git on our development branches. Those plans got shelved when the company starting executing a self-performed lobotomy and laying off engineers right and left. With five of us remaining out of an original 17, there's little point in switching until Windows actively prevents us from running SourceSafe.
Software Zen: delete this;
|
|
|
|
|
I actually do like source safe. It's pretty handy for an at-home dev that doesn't want to deal with the heft of TFS.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013
|
|
|
|
|
#realJSOP wrote: I actually do like source safe.
Welcome to the cult. We need to find a third, preferably one who can be relied on to bring donuts to cult meetings.
Software Zen: delete this;
|
|
|
|
|
I also use SourceSafe, and have for many years. It not only works well, it organizes the repository exactly the way that I want. That doesn't seem to be the case for anything else I have investigated. Worse, there do not appear to be any tools to migrate a SourceSafe database. I also have never had a integrity failure. I have never used Git, but may have to for a current project, or more accurately GitHub, just as a permanent place to park some public code.
|
|
|
|
|
Member 11816776 wrote: GitHub, just as a permanent place to park some public code.
Hmm... nothing in the cloud is permanent. It will all go away eventually, possibly even without warning.
Whether one's own local resources have greater longevity, is of course, dependent on many other factors.
|
|
|
|
|
|
I started with Git + Visual Studio very late with my projects and I have been using it now for 5+ year and have no single complain. I mostly work myself so don't know about any issues working as a team.
I am using Visual Studio UI for creating branches, pushing and syncing. I use command line only for pushing tags, and probably twice had to fix something from command line which I wasn't able through Visual Studio.
But as I am a frequent visitor to GitHub and this repository ASP.NET Core[^] where hundreds of people are contributing and using Visual Studio, I assume it is a great tool for teams as well.
|
|
|
|
|
Lately (especially in VS2019) there are lots of bugs with TFS.
VS folks are adding and changing features for Git, and forgetting about TFS.
I would advise to you search if the problem is already reported, and if it's not reported yet then "Report a Problem"[^].
|
|
|
|
|
The least trouble-free way to use git, in my opinion, is to use its bash shell, and not any GUI integration like the Windows shell or VS interface.
Git just makes so much more sense to me than TFS or its predecessor, Visual SourceSafe, or heaven forbid, SVN, especially when it comes to branching.
If you think 'goto' is evil, try writing an Assembly program without JMP.
|
|
|
|
|
I have experienced horror stories with TFS. I suspect that there is no perfect source control. When it is just one person not even sure it matters which one is used since you don't have any conflicts to speak of.
|
|
|
|
|
With Visual Studio 2019, I just noticed that Windows Forms Designer now names event methods in upper-case. Previously, it was lower-case, which the source code analyzer would complain about.
So, I guess it makes me...happy? Sometimes its the little things in life 
|
|
|
|
|
reading the latest news are you prepared for the big shifts where
- win and uwp (and mfc) will all merge into "windows forms" (or whatever) and,
- .net will merge with .net core into .net core
- new sql stuff, but mostly the old stuff under a different name
so as they claim it'll be the same everywhere/every platform ... except where it's not
(ok, probably got some of that wrong, but then again they themselves release conflicting information each week.)
but with absolute surety you can also rely on
- changing the names of those and other unified platforms/packages (more than once)
- more platforms where "it'll be the same" with more where it actually wont be the same
- removal of more useful features, addition of new useless features and more bloat
happily moving to 2017 now they've stopped buggering about with that.
Message Signature
(Click to edit ->)
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
