Still want to use SourceSafe?
http://www.highprogrammer.com/alan/windev/sourcesafe.html -- Alan Bourke [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
Re: Still want to use SourceSafe?
On 2/16/07, Alan Bourke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > http://www.highprogrammer.com/alan/windev/sourcesafe.html > -- Old post. I understand "Team Studio" has *finally* addressed some of these issues, and that MSFT is forcing their internal developers to eat their own dog food, unlike the mistreatment they gave SourceSafe. VSS was a decent little system, (low resource demands, UNIX/Mac/DOS) with some darn clever design, but never fostered at MS they way they did with VFP. Burning the barn after the horses got out. Subversion rocks! -- Ted Roche Ted Roche & Associates, LLC http://www.tedroche.com ___ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
Re: Still want to use SourceSafe?
On 2/16/07, Ted Roche <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 2/16/07, Alan Bourke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > http://www.highprogrammer.com/alan/windev/sourcesafe.html > > -- > > Old post. I understand "Team Studio" has *finally* addressed some of > these issues, and that MSFT is forcing their internal developers to > eat their own dog food, unlike the mistreatment they gave SourceSafe. > VSS was a decent little system, (low resource demands, UNIX/Mac/DOS) > with some darn clever design, but never fostered at MS they way they > did with VFP. Something that really annoys me about SourceSafe: I made a small EXE for comparing 2 DBFs. All it does is opens the 2 files, LISTs them to 2 text files and runs Windiff. Works great. I can view the history of a DBF and quickly see what has changed between versions. However this works for *.DBF but not *.dbf! (or vice-versa, depending what I put in the config). I can't create 2 file associations because the config won't allow duplicates. Arrgh! -- Paul ___ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
Re: Still want to use SourceSafe?
On 2/17/07, Paul Hill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Something that really annoys me about SourceSafe: > Lots of things annoy me about SourceSafe. That's why I wrote the book, did a dozen presentations, and wrote several white papers. > I made a small EXE for comparing 2 DBFs. All it does is opens the 2 > files, LISTs them to 2 text files and runs Windiff. It's not clear to me what this has to do with SourceSafe. Are you talking about Windiff the commercial product or the diffing functions of SourceSafe? > Works great. I > can view the history of a DBF and quickly see what has changed between > versions. So, you're checking in text versions of DBFs into SourceSafe? That's the technique the FoxPro integration uses for versioning SCX, VCX, MNX, etc files. > However this works for *.DBF but not *.dbf! (or vice-versa, depending > what I put in the config). I can't create 2 file associations because > the config won't allow duplicates. I'm not sure what you're doing with file associations? Which config file? Sounds like a problem with case-sensitive processing on a case-insensitive OS, a real Windows bugaboo. -- Ted Roche Ted Roche & Associates, LLC http://www.tedroche.com ___ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
Re: Still want to use SourceSafe?
On 2/17/07, Ted Roche <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 2/17/07, Paul Hill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Something that really annoys me about SourceSafe: > > > > Lots of things annoy me about SourceSafe. That's why I wrote the book, > did a dozen presentations, and wrote several white papers. > > > I made a small EXE for comparing 2 DBFs. All it does is opens the 2 > > files, LISTs them to 2 text files and runs Windiff. > > It's not clear to me what this has to do with SourceSafe. Are you > talking about Windiff the commercial product or the diffing functions > of SourceSafe? Windiff is external. It's the one that came with Visual Studio 6 IIRC but you can download it for free here: http://www.grigsoft.com/download-windiff.htm > > Works great. I > > can view the history of a DBF and quickly see what has changed between > > versions. > > So, you're checking in text versions of DBFs into SourceSafe? No, binaries. These are system files that rarely change. > > However this works for *.DBF but not *.dbf! (or vice-versa, depending > > what I put in the config). I can't create 2 file associations because > > the config won't allow duplicates. > > I'm not sure what you're doing with file associations? Which config > file? Sounds like a problem with case-sensitive processing on a > case-insensitive OS, a real Windows bugaboo. In VSS you can tell it what viewer & diff program to use for different filetypes. e.g. for *.DBF the viewer is vfp9.exe However, VSS is case sensative over the extensions! So for *.dbf it won't work! -- Paul ___ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
Re: Still want to use SourceSafe?
On 2/18/07, Paul Hill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 2/17/07, Ted Roche <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > So, you're checking in text versions of DBFs into SourceSafe? > > No, binaries. These are system files that rarely change. > Perhaps you might reconsider. A text file (for example, the ones generated by GenDBC) could store a creation script in VSS that would be easily diff'ed. > In VSS you can tell it what viewer & diff program to use for different > filetypes. > e.g. for *.DBF the viewer is vfp9.exe > > However, VSS is case sensative over the extensions! So for *.dbf it won't > work! > Are you using the GUI to set these associations, or editing the config file directly? It's possible the GUI won't let you enter it, but you could add it to the config directly and it might work. I haven't run into this issue before. -- Ted Roche Ted Roche & Associates, LLC http://www.tedroche.com ___ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
Re: Still want to use SourceSafe?
On 2/18/07, Paul Hill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > It's not clear to me what this has to do with SourceSafe. Are you > > talking about Windiff the commercial product or the diffing functions > > of SourceSafe? > > Windiff is external. It's the one that came with Visual Studio 6 IIRC > but you can download it for free here: > http://www.grigsoft.com/download-windiff.htm I'm partial to ExamDiff myself -- http://www.prestosoft.com/ps.asp?page=edp_examdiff Lately, though, I've just needed the diff functionality that comes with TortoiseSVN, the Subversion client you can download from http://tortoisesvn.tigris.org/ (as long as we're on the subject of Source Control :-) ). --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html --- ___ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
