blocks|key|1595260|text|考虑一个更现代的工具，如Git、Mercurial或Darcs。它有很多优点，我将把谷歌搜索作为练习留给读者。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|offset|length|data|1595261|entityMap|0|LINK|mutability|MUTABLE|url|http://git-scm.com/|1|http://www.selenic.com/mercurial/wiki/|2|http://darcs.net/^0|C|3|0|G|9|1|Q|5|2|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|P|8|@]|9|@$A|Q|B|R|1|S]|$A|T|B|U|1|V]|$A|W|B|X|1|Y]]|C|$]]|$1|D|3|-4|5|6|7|Z|8|@]|9|@]|C|$]]]|E|$F|$5|G|H|I|C|$J|K]]|L|$5|G|H|I|C|$J|M]]|N|$5|G|H|I|C|$J|O]]]]

Consider a more modern tool like <a href="http://git-scm.com/" rel="noreferrer">Git</a>, <a href="http://www.selenic.com/mercurial/wiki/" rel="noreferrer">Mercurial</a> or <a href="http://darcs.net/" rel="noreferrer">Darcs</a>. There are plenty of advantages, I'll leave the googling as an exercise to the reader.

blocks|key|1595339|text|我们在我工作的地方使用SVN，通过正确的文档，正确的客户端和工具，这是一件轻而易举的事情-到目前为止，使用它是高度可靠的。在与VSS共事了10年之后，我可以说我一点也不怀念它。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|1595340|我非常喜欢SVN，所以我写了一篇关于我认为最有价值的客户(有些不是)和其他工具的评论。这是一篇新文章，因此非常及时：http://codertools.wordpress.com/2009/03/24/svn-subversion-clients-and-other-tools/|offset|length|1595341|我会毫不犹豫地向任何人推荐SVN+-+GIT是我下一个要考虑的。希望这能对你有所帮助。|1595342|entityMap|0|LINK|mutability|MUTABLE|url|http://codertools.wordpress.com/2009/03/24/svn-subversion-clients-and-other-tools/^0|0|1M|2A|0|0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|P|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|B|3|C|5|6|7|Q|8|@]|9|@$D|R|E|S|1|T]]|A|$]]|$1|F|3|G|5|6|7|U|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|H|3|-4|5|6|7|V|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|I|$J|$5|K|L|M|A|$N|O]]]]

We use SVN where I work and with the right documentation, right client and tools it is a snap - so far it is highly reliable to work with. After having spent the past 10 years with VSS I can say I don't miss it a bit.

I like SVN so much I wrote a review of what I consider to be the most valuable clients (some are not) and additional tools. This is a new article so it is very timely: <a href="http://codertools.wordpress.com/2009/03/24/svn-subversion-clients-and-other-tools/" rel="noreferrer">http://codertools.wordpress.com/2009/03/24/svn-subversion-clients-and-other-tools/</a>

I would not hesitate to recommend SVN to anyone - GIT is next on my list to look at..
Hope this is helpful.

blocks|key|1379721|text|避免一个令人头疼的源代码安全数据库崩溃，将你的整个代码库与它一起是一个大问题。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|1379722|不用担心谁签出了文件是另一回事。|1379723|entityMap^0|0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|F|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|B|3|C|5|6|7|G|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|D|3|-4|5|6|7|H|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|E|$]]

Avoiding the headaches of a Source Safe database crash taking your whole codebase with it is a biggy.

Not having to worry about who has a file checked out is another.

blocks|key|1379825|text|我发现用VSS合并文件很麻烦，但用SVN很棒。此外，我没有任何证据表明这一点，但SVN似乎更快。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|1379826|entityMap^0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|D|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|B|3|-4|5|6|7|E|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|C|$]]

I find merging files with VSS to be very cumbersome, but it's great with SVN. Also, and I don't have any evidence of this, but SVN seems faster.

blocks|key|1595040|text|VSS是旧的和过时的。数据库经常被破坏。这也是微软构建TFS的原因。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|1595041|SVN非常流行(意味着大量的社区支持，意味着免费支持)，有许多工具可以与其挂钩(例如，用于持续集成的CruiseControl)，并且使用起来相当简单。|1595042|如果你已经在使用VSS，你必须考虑到学习曲线，这是你在研究中必须权衡的东西。如果其他开发人员没有使用过SVN+(或CVS)，那么成本可能会很高，尽管您所需要的只是一个真正了解系统并指导其他人的人。|1595043|4年前我们确实从VSS变成了SVN，从那以后我们就再也没有回头看过。|1595044|entityMap^0|0|0|0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|J|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|B|3|C|5|6|7|K|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|D|3|E|5|6|7|L|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|F|3|G|5|6|7|M|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|H|3|-4|5|6|7|N|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|I|$]]

VSS is old and outdated. The database gets corrupted way too often. There's a reason why MS built TFS too.

SVN is very popular (meaning lots of community support, meaning free support), there are many tools that hook to it (CruiseControl for Continuous Integration for example) and it's rather simple to use.

You have to consider there's a learning curve if you are already using VSS and that's something that you have to weigh in your research. If the other developers haven't used SVN (or CVS) then it could be costly, although all you need is one person who really gets to know the system and then coach the rest.

We did change from VSS to SVN 4 years ago and we haven't looked back since.

blocks|key|1379971|text|顺便说一句，我们使用Sourcegear+Vault已经有很多年了。拥有存储库和中央SQL+Server数据库，再加上对互联网的良好访问，这对我们的组织来说是一件很棒的事情。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|1379972|我认为它的价格合理，至少值得一看。|1379973|entityMap^0|0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|F|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|B|3|C|5|6|7|G|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|D|3|-4|5|6|7|H|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|E|$]]

Just as an aside, we've been using Sourcegear Vault for a number of years quite happily. Having repositories and a central SQL Server database along with great access over the internets made it a slam dunk for our organization.

I think it's reasonably priced and at least worth a look.

blocks|key|1380067|text|AnkhSVN+2.0真的很棒。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|offset|length|data|1380068|如果需要集成Visual+Studio，我早在一年前就对SVN发出了警告，但这种情况已经发生了很大的变化。比方说，它仍然不如VS+Team+System好，但它比基于MSSCCI的旧VSS集成要好得多。没有理由不将SVN与.NET一起使用。|1380069|entityMap|0|LINK|mutability|MUTABLE|url|http://ankhsvn.open.collab.net/^0|0|B|0|0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|N|8|@]|9|@$A|O|B|P|1|Q]]|C|$]]|$1|D|3|E|5|6|7|R|8|@]|9|@]|C|$]]|$1|F|3|-4|5|6|7|S|8|@]|9|@]|C|$]]]|G|$H|$5|I|J|K|C|$L|M]]]]

<a href="http://ankhsvn.open.collab.net/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">AnkhSVN 2.0</a> is really very good. 

If you had Visual Studio integration as a requirement, I would have warned against SVN even a year ago, but that's changed in a big way. It's still not as good as, say, VS Team System, but it's much better than the old MSSCCI-based VSS integration. There's no reason not to use SVN with .NET.

blocks|key|1595103|text|SourceGear存储库是VSS的优秀替代品。它一开始是"VSS功能，但使用的是真正的数据库“，并从那里发展起来。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|1595104|entityMap^0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|D|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|B|3|-4|5|6|7|E|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|C|$]]

SourceGear Vault is an excellent replacement for VSS. It started out being "VSS features but using a real database", and grew from there.

blocks|key|1595157|text|几乎可以肯定是SVN。SVN采用了一种不同的工作方式(复制-修改-合并而不是Lock-Modify-Unlock)。这是一个学习曲线，但这是事情已经走了几年的方式，所以大多数开发人员将不得不在某个时间或其他时间学习它。Lock-Modify-Unlock是一件非常痛苦的事情，而且它还造成了严重的协作问题，如果你感兴趣的话，我很乐意向你解释。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|1595158|附和关于VSS有多糟糕的评论。以下是涵盖该主题的各种链接：|1595159|http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/archives/000660.html|offset|length|1595160|http://www.developsense.com/testing/VSSDefects.html|1595161|http://wadhome.org/svn_vs_vss.html|1595162|编辑:另请参阅：Source+Control+-+Lock+vs.+Merge?|1595163|entityMap|0|LINK|mutability|MUTABLE|url|1|2|3|https://stackoverflow.com/questions/283221/source-control-lock-vs-merge#283236^0|0|0|0|1H|0|0|0|1F|1|0|0|Y|2|0|8|W|3|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|Y|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|B|3|C|5|6|7|Z|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|D|3|E|5|6|7|10|8|@]|9|@$F|11|G|12|1|13]]|A|$]]|$1|H|3|I|5|6|7|14|8|@]|9|@$F|15|G|16|1|17]]|A|$]]|$1|J|3|K|5|6|7|18|8|@]|9|@$F|19|G|1A|1|1B]]|A|$]]|$1|L|3|M|5|6|7|1C|8|@]|9|@$F|1D|G|1E|1|1F]]|A|$]]|$1|N|3|-4|5|6|7|1G|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|O|$P|$5|Q|R|S|A|$T|E]]|U|$5|Q|R|S|A|$T|I]]|V|$5|Q|R|S|A|$T|K]]|W|$5|Q|R|S|A|$T|X]]]]

Almost Definitely SVN. SVN sports a different way of working (Copy-Modify-Merge instead of Lock-Modify-Unlock). It's a bit of a learning curve, but it's the way things have gone for several years now, so most devs will have to learn it at some time or other anyway. Lock-Modify-Unlock is way too much of a pain, and there are serious collaboration problems that it actually contributes to, which I'd be happy to explain if you're curious.

Seconding the comments about how bad VSS is as well. Here are various links that cover the topic:

<a href="http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/archives/000660.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/archives/000660.html</a>

<a href="http://www.developsense.com/testing/VSSDefects.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">http://www.developsense.com/testing/VSSDefects.html</a>

<a href="http://wadhome.org/svn_vs_vss.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">http://wadhome.org/svn_vs_vss.html</a>

Edit: See also:
<a href="https://stackoverflow.com/questions/283221/source-control-lock-vs-merge#283236">Source Control - Lock vs. Merge?</a>

blocks|key|1380265|text|作为一个经历了VSS+SCM+SVN过渡过程的大型代码库的人，我想说最大的好处是能够睡个好觉，知道你的->系统不会突然出现损坏数据库的小故障，你必须回到昨天的备份。你每天都会备份数据库，对吧？|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|1380266|使用VSS，损坏每月至少发生一次。使用SVN+(相同的硬件和操作系统)-在两年多的时间里不会有一次。|1380267|哦，分支/合并功能非常棒！|1380268|entityMap^0|0|0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|H|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|B|3|C|5|6|7|I|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|D|3|E|5|6|7|J|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|F|3|-4|5|6|7|K|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|G|$]]

Speaking as someone who went through the VSS -> SVN transition process for a large codebase, I would say the biggest benefit is being able to sleep soundly knowing that your SCM system wont suddenly have a hiccup that corrupts your database and you have to go back to yesterday's backup. You do backup your database daily, right?

With VSS, corruption happened at least once per month. With SVN (same hardware &amp; OS) - not once in over two years.

Oh, and the branching/merging capabilities are sweet!

blocks|key|1595466|text|当然，基于上面提到的所有原因，请使用SVN。你可以试试ankhsvn，这是一个用于visual+studio的svn插件。这样你就两全其美了:使用SVN，所有的工作仍然可以在visual+studio中完成。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|offset|length|data|1595467|entityMap|0|LINK|mutability|MUTABLE|url|http://ankhsvn.open.collab.net/^0|R|7|0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|L|8|@]|9|@$A|M|B|N|1|O]]|C|$]]|$1|D|3|-4|5|6|7|P|8|@]|9|@]|C|$]]]|E|$F|$5|G|H|I|C|$J|K]]]]

Definitely, go with SVN, for all stated reasons above. You could try it <a href="http://ankhsvn.open.collab.net/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">ankhsvn</a> which is a svn plugin for visual studio. This way you get the best of both worlds: using SVN and all work still gets done inside visual studio.

blocks|key|1380331|text|只是对Koista+Navin的回答的补充。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|1380332|他说:这里有一本关于这个主题的好书:C+Pilato的Version+Control+with+Subversion|1380333|有一个免费的在线版本：|1380334|http://svnbook.red-bean.com/|offset|length|1380335|entityMap|0|LINK|mutability|MUTABLE|url^0|0|0|0|0|S|0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|Q|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|B|3|C|5|6|7|R|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|D|3|E|5|6|7|S|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|F|3|G|5|6|7|T|8|@]|9|@$H|U|I|V|1|W]]|A|$]]|$1|J|3|-4|5|6|7|X|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|K|$L|$5|M|N|O|A|$P|G]]]]

Just an addition to Koista Navin's answer.

He said: Here is a great book on this subject: Version Control with Subversion by C Pilato

There is a free online version:

<a href="http://svnbook.red-bean.com/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">http://svnbook.red-bean.com/</a>

blocks|key|1595502|text|Team+Foundation+Server是在.NET世界中进行开发的最佳选择。然而，它不是免费的，对于当前的2008版本来说，它可能相当昂贵。如果你有更高级的Visual+Studio包，你确实可以免费获得TFS工作组版，它允许5个用户访问，而不需要额外的费用。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|1595503|工作组版有一些主要的警告，您必须使用5个插槽中的一个用于TFS服务帐户，除非您将其设置为在将包含在TFS成员列表中的用户帐户下运行。另一个是，一旦你达到了5个用户的限制，跳到6个用户是一个相当惊人的成本，因为目前的许可证要求包括为团队中的每个成员购买服务器(几千美元)和CAL。在团队中再增加一名成员是一个相当昂贵的成本。|1595504|然而，微软已经意识到这一点，并将在2010年改变这一点。您将不再需要购买服务器本身，只需购买CAL。TFS+2010+server+licensing:+It's+included+in+MSDN+subscriptions|offset|length|1595505|entityMap|0|LINK|mutability|MUTABLE|url|http://blogs.msdn.com/buckh/archive/2009/10/20/tfs-2010-server-licensing-it-s-included-in-msdn-subscriptions.aspx^0|0|0|1E|1Q|0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|P|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|B|3|C|5|6|7|Q|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|D|3|E|5|6|7|R|8|@]|9|@$F|S|G|T|1|U]]|A|$]]|$1|H|3|-4|5|6|7|V|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|I|$J|$5|K|L|M|A|$N|O]]]]

Team Foundation Server is the optimal choice for developing in the .NET world. However it is not free and for the current version 2008 it can be quite expensive. If you have higher level package for Visual Studio you do get TFS workgroup edition for free which allows 5 users access for no additional cost.

There are some major caveats to the workgroup edition you must use one of the 5 slots for the TFS service account unless you set it up to run under a users account that will be included in the TFS member list. The other is once you hit your 5 user limit the jump to 6 users is a fairly staggering cost as the current license requirements include the need to purchase the server (a few thousand dollars) AND CALs for every member of the team. That's a fairly prohibitive cost to add one more member to the team.

However, Microsoft has come to realize this and is changing this for 2010. You will no longer need to purchase the server itself and will only need to purchase CALs. <a href="http://blogs.msdn.com/buckh/archive/2009/10/20/tfs-2010-server-licensing-it-s-included-in-msdn-subscriptions.aspx" rel="nofollow noreferrer">TFS 2010 server licensing: It's included in MSDN subscriptions</a>

At work, one of the head managers asked me to research on what could be the benefits of changing the current source control server (Visual Source Safe) of my project to SVN. 

I really don't have anything against SVN, actually I kind of dig it, but in my humble opinion, change to SVN will not bring any significant benefits to the project, and will force us to use some third-party tools to manage the source control from the Visual Studio (we develop using mostly Microsoft tools only).

So, as a first step in my research, I ask you: what could be the benefits of switching from VSS to SVN?

VSS or SVN for a .Net Project?

备份数据库

Visual Studio

SQL Server

数据库

服务器

在工作中，一位主管让我研究一下将我的项目的当前源代码控制服务器(Visual source Safe)更改为SVN会有什么好处。我真的不反对SVN，实际上我有点喜欢它，但在我看来，更改到SVN不会给项目带来任何显著的好处，而是会迫使我们使用一些第三方工具来管理Visual Studio中的源代码控制(我们主要使用Microsoft工具进行开发)。因此，作为我研究的第一步，我问您:从VSS切换到SV

问.Net项目的VSS还是SVN？
EN

回答 13

Stack Overflow用户

Stack Overflow用户

Stack Overflow用户

社区

活动

资源

关于

腾讯云开发者

热门产品

热门推荐

更多推荐

问.Net项目的VSS还是SVN？EN

回答 13

Stack Overflow用户

Stack Overflow用户

Stack Overflow用户

社区

活动

资源

关于

腾讯云开发者

热门产品

热门推荐

更多推荐

问.Net项目的VSS还是SVN？
EN