Whitepaper: Enhanced Source Control for Multi-Project Solutions

Alfredo Mendez, with the help of my incomparable editor (you know who you
are:), published a whitepaper about source control integration in Visual Studio .NET
2003 yesterday on MSDN. 

Tagline, "See how Visual Studio .NET 2003 offers simpler, easier source control
for multi-project solutions through the use of a solution root
."  Read/Rate/Comment:
Source Control for Multi-Project Solutions

Congratulations, Alfredo!  You're in print, buddy.

Related Weblog Posts/Background Reading

.ROOT Folder and "Unified Root"

on Creating Projects and Solutions

is a Source Control Binding?

Este mensaje se proporciona "como está" sin garantías de ninguna clase, y no otorga
ningún derecho.

Comments (6)

  1. Don McNamara says:


    We’re trying to speed up our Source Safe interaction — specifically with gets in mind. (Right now, 80-90% of our build time is source safe interaction.)

    Do you know if anyone has done any practical trials on improving the performance of Source Safe? For example, comparing running a Source Safe server on a dual proc machine vs. a single proc machine. 10 Mbit vs 100 Mbit vs 1Gbit network interfaces. Striped RAID vs. simple hard drive?

    I was thinking of putting a gigabit ethernet connection between the build machine and the source safe server, but I’m not sure if its going to buy me anything. Would it be better to invest in a nice high performance disk?

    I tried asking on the newsgroups but the only response was: combine the source safe server and the build machine. This isn’t something I want to do.

    Any ideas would be appreciated.


  2. Jamie Eisenhart (MSFT) says:


    The #1 thing that you can do to improve Get speed is to decrease network latency between the build and database machines. This matters more than bandwidth in most cases.

    Another idea would be to try running the Get on the database machine and then doing a file system copy (robocopy) to get the content on the build machine. That way the Get is local but you don’t tie up your database server doing the build.

    Hope that helps!


  3. Joseph Healy says:

    Korby / Alfredo,

    I was under the impression from earlier recomemendations that one should have projects, but not solutions, checked in for team-based projects. Has this recommendation changed?


  4. Alfredo Mendez says:

    Hi Joseph,

    My guess is that those recommendations of not checkin in the solution are partially due to the issues with Source Control Integration before Visual Studio .Net. Before .Net changes to user preferences would check out the project group file, and make it fairly easy to overwrite other team member’s settings.

    In .Net all user-specifc settings are stored separately in the .suo file, which SCC knows not to check in. The only cases where the solution file gets checked out is when you are adding/removing/renaming projects or miscellaneous files. As long as you make sure that these ‘re-structuring’ types of changes are done in isolation (e.g. other team members have no checkouts/local changes) I believe is well worth to have VS manage your app codebase as a single solution.

    Hence for the vast majority of cases, I would recommend having the solution checked into source control. Less prompts, less hassle to setup your work environment.

    If the codebase you are working on with your team mates does not ‘logically’ represent a ‘Application’ [notice how vague I’m getting here 😉 ], and each team member picks and chooses the projects they work on, then maybe there is no need for checking in the solution. A typical example of this is a set of shared libraries, they are not a ‘single app’ and you would not work on all libraries at the same time, hence it may makes more sense to work with them as individual projects.

    PS: Check out other great posts Korby has made in the blog about working with solutions/projects under SCC. There are great tips on those posts.

  5. sorbitan says:

    Hello, very interesting site, nice work.

    <a href=" http://xanaxbuy.bht0a.info/buy-xanax-cheap.html ">buy xanax cheap</a>
    <a href=" http://xanax.klpll.info/xanax-order.html ">xanax order</a>


Skip to main content