Your Comments.

•  re: TFS vs SubVersion

  cool comparison

  Left by albert at 11/22/2006 2:45 PM
•  re: TFS vs SubVersion

  Just a note:
  "Web based interface" and "Linux/Unix/Mac support" is available for TFS from 3:d party vendors (at a cost of course)

  Left by Andreas at 11/22/2006 7:10 PM
•  re: TFS vs SubVersion

  Add Trac (http://trac.edgewall.org/) for wiki interface to SubVersion and Issues Tracker

  Left by Brit at 11/24/2006 8:33 AM
•  re: TFS vs SubVersion

  Not really useful comparison. It is not really comparing an apple to an apple. SubVersion is mainly a source control system. TFS is much more than source control. It is like comparing my house has more things than your bedroom.

  Left by Ming at 12/25/2006 8:48 PM
•  re: TFS vs SubVersion

  It will be a good comparison by having TFS vs (SubVersion and others Third Party Tools)

  Left by Betty at 1/13/2007 3:11 PM
•  re: TFS vs SubVersion

  TFS as a source control system is poor. Subversion just makes more sense.
  
  In TFS to edit a file you need to run get latest, then right click a file and check it out and then make changes, but it never gives any indication that you made a change. Commits are based on what you checked out for edit not what changes were actually made. so you can actually make changes to a file without checking it out and without TFS knowing that you edited it.
  
  Subversion work much smoother. You check out the whole repository at a time and when you commit it knows what changes were made, if there are conflicts it merges files and if it can't merge it asks to you make some decisions.
  

  Left by Jankrod at 1/16/2007 3:59 AM
•  re: TFS vs SubVersion( and third party tools)

  TFS as a source control system is poor. Subversion just makes more sense.
  ????
  
  
  You are one crazy dude of course TFS tracks every single change it knows if you actually made a change it is a really powerful tool not only for source control but workflows and work tracking.
  

  Left by Some guy at 2/17/2007 2:37 PM
•  bugaga, LOL!

  > It will be a good comparison by having TFS vs (SubVersion and others Third Party Tools)
  
  true, but add words "open source" before "3rd Party Tools"
  
  LOL again

  Left by Alexander Vasiliev at 2/19/2007 6:14 AM
•  re: TFS vs SubVersion (open source)

  this is wrong comparison.
  you have to compare
  Team Foundation Version Control vs Subversion
  ________________________
  Team Foundation =Subversion(with apache)+Nant+CCNET+TortoiseSVN+Ankh+Gemini

  Left by erkan saldir at 3/1/2007 8:38 PM
•  re: TFS vs SubVersion (open source)

  >this is wrong comparison.
  >you have to compare
  >Team Foundation Version Control vs >Subversion
  >________________________
  >Team Foundation =Subversion(with apache)>+Nant+CCNET+TortoiseSVN+Ankh+Gemini
  
  Totally agree, this is a totally wrong comparison. You compare something that is unique TFS but you dint mention any unique feature from SVN. You are looking it from a point of view of TFS. Too prejudice.

  Left by andy at 3/11/2007 3:34 PM
•  re: TFS vs SubVersion (open source)

  Thank Andy and Erkan saldir, I will update it soon.

  Left by Blog Author at 3/13/2007 2:05 AM
•  re: TFS vs SubVersion,Nant,CCNET,Tortoise,Ankh,Gemini (open source)

  One important metric is whether you can work while OFFLINE. Imagine you want to modify a file while working on your laptop (e.g in the plane or when visiting a customer).
  
  You will run into probs when you 'just' modify files which are under TFS control and then tell TFS what you did when you're back online.
  
  In SVN, that just works.

  Left by Christian Geuer-Pollmann at 4/19/2007 8:42 AM
•  re: TFS vs SubVersion,Nant,CCNET,Tortoise,Ankh,Gemini (open source)

  Excellent point Christian Geuer Pollmann, OFFLINE feature will be the advantages of SVN.
  

  Left by Blog Author at 4/29/2007 9:04 AM
• # re: TFS vs SubVersion,Nant,CCNET,Tortoise,Ankh,Gemini (open source)

  Hi
  
  We've used Sourcesafe as SCM for our company for years.
  Now we've decidet to switch to TFS. After some research, we decided not to do it... :)
  
  This are the points why we are not using TFS at all...
  
  1. Configuration too complex
  1.1 There are n+1 database needet, sharepoint installation, reporting service, build service, etc.
  1.2 The installation configuration take about a week, and was not that clear to me.
  1.3 The TFS Installer sucks
  2. Administration too complex
  3. We can't use workitems out of the box for our project
  3.1 We need online access for the workitem(it's possible with TeamPlain), but it is a too technical aproach for sharing it with our customer
  4. If you use only SCM, it seems to me that SVN is the better tool.
  5. Price. As long as you're gold partner of microsoft, it's not a problem. But if you once loose this status, you've to pay a lot of money.
  
  Personally, i think TFS is a good product, but you have to spend a lot of time configuring/administrating it, till you get the full potential(workitem,checkin-rules,testautomation).
  
  just my two cent
  
  cheers
  manuel
  
  
  
  ps:
  sorry for my poor english.. :)
  

  Left by manuel at 8/8/2007 2:35 AM
•  re: TFS vs SubVersion,Nant,CCNET,Tortoise,Ankh,Gemini (open source)

  we start to use subversion for 12 month we face some problems with handling binary files only like dcu in delphi
  
  i wonder if this a problem also in TFS or what
  thanks

  Left by Ebrahim Hassan at 9/13/2007 12:52 AM
•  re: TFS vs SubVersion,Nant,CCNET,Tortoise,Ankh,Gemini (open source)

  shelving != svn Patch. Shelvings are stored at the repository.
  
  Does TFS have the svn Switch funcionality?. I didnt found it. I need to download the entire working copy when I decide to create a new branch.

  Left by Estrada at 10/16/2007 4:13 AM
•  re: TFS vs SubVersion,Nant,CCNET,Tortoise,Ankh,Gemini (open source)

  Good comparison on two SCM system from all perspective. Very helpful in establishing SCM for organizations.

  Left by Chandresh J Makwana at 10/23/2007 10:45 PM
•  re: TFS vs SubVersion,Nant,CCNET,Tortoise,Ankh,Gemini (open source)

  For our team we use Subversion(with apache), Nant, CCNET, TortoiseSVN, Ankh & SharpForge
  
  

  Left by Mohindra at 3/26/2008 5:24 PM
•  re: TFS vs SubVersion,Nant,CCNET,Tortoise,Ankh,Gemini (open source)

  I've joined an organization that had TFS in place, coming from a subversion shop. I have to say that TFS, while it looks good on paper, is incredibly painful to use as a source repository and fails to deliver anything close to the promised feature set.
  
  * TFS is _SLOW_
  * TFS requires a dedicated server (for Sharepoint)
  * TFS auto-messes with my local source every time I open a solution (yes, I know I could dig into Visual Studio and turn this off)
  * TFS fights you if you want an alternate source tree hierarchy from it's default
  * TFS is _SLOW_
  * TFS requires the "Team $ystem" versions of Visual Studio to use as a source repository.
  * The Microsoft unit testing suite is _SLOW_ and sub-par in this release when compared to NUnit or MBUnit (not part of TFS, but part of team suite, which is a package deal)
  * TFS command line client blows/is all but non-existant
  * TFS is _SLOW_
  * TFS only plays with Visual Studio Team System - your graphic artist cannot use the source repository as well
  * The TFS "project management/work item" integration consists of linking to an Excel spreadsheet thru Sharepoint (total suck) and does not support any of the major project management tools in the market (other than maybe MS Project - which is a POS)
  * TFS is a lock-in play to Microsoft-only solutions (which are far from best of breed in all cases)
  
  on the other hand:
  
  * Subversion is fast.
  * Subversion does not require "on" connectivity to the repository.
  * It is easy to configure multiple local workspaces against the same repository branch.
  * Branching and merging in Subversion is a snap (well, maybe not merging)
  * Subversion is development environment/tool agnostic
  * Subversion repositories are portable
  * Many vendors supply Subversion integrations (in addition to trac), like Rally (Agile project management) and Mercury (Quality Center test management suite)
  
  The only strike against subversion is that you have to stitch together multiple tools from different vendors and maybe some custom scripting to achieve the features that TFS promises(checkin policies, bug tracking integration, etc.). Of course, you won't be spending 1-2 weeks plus a lifetime partial resource to configure and manage Subversion.
  

  Left by Racer X at 4/16/2008 11:21 AM
•  re: TFS vs SubVersion,Nant,CCNET,Tortoise,Ankh,Gemini (open source)

  My $0.02...
  
  SVN supports check-in policy in a limited fashion, via commit hooks; you can do anything you want here, but there is no canned functionality out of the box.
  
  Work items are not strictly related to SCM, though correlation between commits and work items is nice.
  
  The remaining items under Source Control marked with ???s are largely unrelated to source control. These are addressed further in other sections, but the entries under Source Control remain, and are, IMO, misleading.
  
  As to the ???s in Team Build, code analysis (using FxCop) and unit tests (*Unit of choice) can be run and reports generated using CC.NET. No idea on code churn, though I would presume there is something available for this outside TFS.
  
  Other points:
  
  Atomic commits are missing; this is a very important feature for active projects with more than a few files. (e.g., any project worth putting in source control.) VSS certainly cannot do this, but I'm not sure about TFS. (My understanding is no; correct me if I'm wrong.) SVN was designed specifically to do this easily and reliably, even in the face of client failure.
  
  On binary files: add the appropriate SVN property to the file, and it will be handled correctly. Subversion's binary file detection isn't foolproof, but can be easily overridden when necessary. If you run into this frequently, you can use SVN's auto-props feature to automatically set the properties on files based on the extension.
  
  Reliability and maintenance are also issues: we have a SVN system here that, apart from OS issues/maintenance unrelated to SVN or adding new repositories (using TortoiseSVN via a file share) for new projects, it hasn't been messed with in over a year, and has few if any SVN-related problems.
  
  If only TFS could use SVN for source control...

  Left by Phil at 4/24/2008 2:50 PM
•  re: TFS vs SubVersion,Nant,CCNET,Tortoise,Ankh,Gemini (open source)

  SVN is much better at branching and merging. We moved from SVN to TFS and had to redesign our entire branch structure as most of the merges we wanted to do ended up being baseless in TFS. Merges that just worked in SVN required us to inspect 3000 items manually in TFS.
  
  TFS merging is awful.

  Left by Chris h at 5/11/2008 4:30 PM
•  re: TFS vs SubVersion,Nant,CCNET,Tortoise,Ankh,Gemini (open source)

  
  Using TFS + Agile template for scc, testing, work items, builds, etc.
  
  We have a dedicated server for host, with separate web servers and build servers.
  
  It works fine, the UT's are plenty fast (no slower than NUnit, and fixes several bugs in Nunit).
  
  Just like any sharepoint site, we store,track, edit and exchange information in documents via a web interface.
  
  TFS's project portal is just a sharepoint template. We customized ours, added some reports and are happy with it.
  
  VS2005 + Team Developer, with auto checkout on edit + some other settings. All our devs commit with comments & work item. It tracks nicely and we're able to have continuous integration, continuous tracking/velocity reporting. Integrates nicely with Feature-Driven & Agile concepts we're using.
  
  Once you pay for it, it does everything I used to tie together with Nunit + Ncover + NAnt + SVN + Tortoise + Gemini. It's actually very slick. Work appears under a dev's list and they just edit, run tests and commit.
  

  Left by franklin at 5/12/2008 12:26 PM
•  re: TFS vs SubVersion,Nant,CCNET,Tortoise,Ankh,Gemini (open source)

  Just when I think TFS can't get any worse, it does. As our source tree has grown TFS has become more and more unstable. It goes down at least 3x a week.
  
  We just did a mass-conversion of our projects, prompting a couple hundred developers to all update their source trees. Guess what - TFS screwed the pooch. It was crash-tastic. I counted three hard reboots from the build group before I gave up and went home for the day (you really can't work in a TFS-backed environment if the repository is down, unlike Subversion).
  

  Left by Racer X at 6/24/2008 4:14 AM

Your Reply.