4 ms·
Yes, MS Visual Sourcesafe (VSS). It was... not very good
by Sander_Marechal 3y ago
Yes, MS Visual Sourcesafe (VSS). It was... not very good
- grimjack00 3y agoIt was, however, a step up from the shared network drive with a bunch of zip files.
- politician 3y agoDebatable. You would come into work in the morning and find that VSS had been corrupted and needed to be restored to an earlier backup. This was a common occurrence.
- prepend 3y agoThat the lovely common occurrence of someone checking out 1000 files and going on vacation. I preferred just a normal folder, rsync (or some nt utils equivalent) and backups.
- wheelie_boy 3y agothey also had an internal source control system that they never released, which was a fork of perforce that they had purchased the rights to use and modify. Not sure if that's still in use in any projects.
- AndrewStephens 3y agoBack in the late 90s we used to call it Visual SourceSieve - code changes would just leak away through the holes. Words cannot explain how much of a step up git (or even SVN) was. As I recall, the main problem was that VSS didn't have a proper server! Instead the client modified files in the repository directly using Window's file sharing, relying on locks to maintain consistency. This would have been a bad idea even in Window's file shares weren't slow and buggy.
- fanf2 3y agoI believe Visual Source Unsafe used the same storage layer as early versions of Exchange, which would break catastrophically when the underlying file grew past 2GB. Less than ideal.