ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Steve Loughran <>
Subject Re: VOTE ant-vss antlib promote to antlib proper
Date Tue, 01 Aug 2006 11:11:59 GMT
Kev Jackson wrote:
> On 1 Aug 2006, at 11:47, Alexey Solofnenko wrote:
>> -0 Microsoft itself does not use it. Are we going to support already
>> obsolete technology?
> Really?  What is the new MS scm system or recommended scm system?  I 
> though VSS was basically the MS standard.

MS never used VSS internally. Do you think they are mad? They used to 
use something called SCUM and then I think went to ClearCase or 
Perforce. VSS is unreliable junk that doesnt scale and when it fails, 
fails big time with the entire history of files disappearing. Also its 
model of tagging and branching sucks.

VSS was always "SCM for the little people", its selling points being a 
good GUI, no need for a server/central admin, and tight integration with 
Visual Studio.

The successor, well, it goes for server-side revenue too, and does tight 
integration with lots of things, but its a fiddly beast to bring up.

> As for support, we already do support vss through an optional task, my 
> proposal is to remove this from the core of ant and have an antlib 
> instead - that way the core will not carry around vss related code - I 
> think this is better but if you have a better idea (perhaps simply rip 
> out the optional task altogether).

I am +1 for moving VSS support into its own antlib. The only problem is 
that adding the antlib to ANT_HOME/lib will not ensure that existing 
build files will work, because to get the stuff autoloaded, they need to 
declare it in a new namespace. Unless, that is, the main file still declares the existing task in its (new) 

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message