Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Microsoft Embraces Git For Development Tools

samzenpus posted about a year and a half ago | from the strange-bedfellows dept.

Microsoft 227

alphadogg writes "Once vehemently opposed to open-source software, Microsoft has warmed to the development model over the years and will now take the unusual step of incorporating an open-source program developed by Linus Torvalds into its own development tools. Microsoft is integrating the widely used Git, a distributed revision control and source code management system, into its Visual Studio IDE and Team Foundation Server, two of the company's main tools for enterprise developers."

cancel ×

227 comments

1st step. (2, Insightful)

Kenja (541830) | about a year and a half ago | (#42745999)

Step 1: Embrace. Step 2: Extend. Step 3: Replace. Step 4: Discontinue.

Re:1st step. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42746063)

LOL. I'm trying to imagine a universe with Torvalds moving Linux into some Microsoft-controlled source control.

Re:1st step. (1, Troll)

rubycodez (864176) | about a year and a half ago | (#42746137)

oh yes, Microsoft Source Safe can scale upwards to a planet-wide kernel development effort. If I remember from my employer who used it, it only started showing problems at over twelve users......bwhahahahaha!

Re:1st step. (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42746173)

VSS != TFS. Might be time to catch up with 5 years ago. [wikipedia.org] And yes TFS can scale.

Re:1st step. (-1, Troll)

rubycodez (864176) | about a year and a half ago | (#42746267)

oh ain't that special, can scale up to 100 users on a single server, maybe. ROFL

Re:1st step. (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42746307)

Uhhh no. TFS can easily run 1k users per server. Try not to look like a retarded neckbeard stuck in 2001 when you reply.

Re:1st step. (-1, Troll)

rubycodez (864176) | about a year and a half ago | (#42746327)

sorry, I read microsoft's reccommendations. better sell your stock, fan-boi, windows 8 and that tablet are floppin'

Re:1st step. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42746435)

No you didn't. [microsoft.com] Liar.

Try not to look like a retarded neckbeard stuck in 2001 when you reply.

Re:1st step. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42746601)

Shill.

Re:1st step. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42746645)

If stating the truth makes me a shill, then I guess I'm a shill. Better than being a liar.

Re:1st step. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42746745)

Liar.

Re:1st step. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42747157)

Stating the truth instead of being a retarded fuck like you isn't being a shill you moronic waste of a cumshot.

Re:1st step. (1)

hawkinspeter (831501) | about a year and a half ago | (#42748315)

Looks like someone's a bit tetchy today.

Re:1st step. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42746281)

Not many people uses TFS especially not after VSS. Also, TFS is really hard to set up. SVN on windows is a whole lot easier.

Re:1st step. (3, Funny)

gargleblast (683147) | about a year and a half ago | (#42746311)

And yes TFS can scale.

And at US$499 per user Cal [microsoftstore.com] , so can its price.

Re:1st step. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42746357)

Good thing those are included with an MSDN subscription then.

Re:1st step. (1)

armanox (826486) | about a year and a half ago | (#42746417)

You only are licensed one user per subscription.

Re:1st step. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42747271)

You only are licensed one user per subscription.

Do you think that's news to anybody?

Re:1st step. (3, Interesting)

cheesybagel (670288) | about a year and a half ago | (#42746387)

Considering Microsoft themselves prefer to use Perforce for Windows development I would venture to guess that TFS doesn't scale all that well in reality.

Re:1st step. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42747347)

actually TFS is based off of perforce. MS bought the source code to perforce. Now it isn't suppose to be perforce source but perforce inspired what ever that means. IMPO a perforce clone.

Re:1st step. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42746853)

And yes TFS can scale.

For some definitions of scale...

Review: Team Foundation Server

Until a few months or so ago, the policy where I worked was to use Microsoft’s Visual Source Safe (VSS) for source control. Now, granted, VSS does have something of a reputation for corrupting your repository, which is generally considered to be an unforgivable sin for a source control system. That, however, never happened to me, and VSS wasn’t particularly unusable. However, my current employer has started using Microsoft’s newer source control system, Team Foundation Server (TFS), which, I can honestly say is the first source control system to ever make me wish desperately for the sweet release of a corrupted repository

http://blog.motheyes.com/2010/02/review-team-foundation-server/ [motheyes.com]

Re:1st step. (1)

dcooper_db9 (1044858) | about a year and a half ago | (#42747063)

You have to read the whole article :-) "In addition to including Git with TFS, Microsoft is also linking Git with its Visual Studio IDE. The company has released a plug-in that will allow users to commit finished code directly to any Git repository. "

Re:1st step. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42747323)

A company I worked at a few years ago migrated to TFS and with around 30 users it ran dog slow. In addition, by default TFS is set up to work like VSS, meaning that it locks files exclusively for anyone who has a file checked out. This means that you have to wait until someone is done working on an area of the code before you can also work on that area. This is because the files are set to read-only and you can't edit them in Visual Studio until you check them out. Which makes all the developers copy the source code to a different writable directory to get any work done. And, if someone goes on vacation and the files are still checked out, you have to contact an administrator and try to reason with them that they need to unlock the files. Not to mention, unlike git/svn/etc where the source control is completely separate from the IDE, Microsoft's solutions are tightly integrated with it. This means that operations involving TFS lock up the entire IDE and you have to wait before you can edit any code at all. It locks up the interface in a bad way too because it isn't multithreaded, so sometimes Windows will tell you that the application seems locked do you want to kill it or keep waiting if you try to click anywhere on the IDE if it's in the middle of anything related to TFS. Last but not least, if Visual Studio crashes, which it tends to do on occasion, it forces you to start over with whatever you were planning to do in TFS. And, if TFS was in the middle of checking in files for example, it can leave it in a critical state that requires finesse to clean up. Would MS switching to Git fix any of this? Some but not all, because many of the problems are related to Microsoft's VSS-style integration of SCMs. And, also because Microsoft just doesn't "Get It."

Re:1st step. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42747521)

Umm, no. By default TFS works like Subversion - edit/merge/commit, not lock/edit/unlock. TFS does keep files read-only; you need to tell the server you're changing the file by doing a tfs "edit" operation. But all that's doing is telling the server that "hey, include this file in my next checkin."

You can argue that keeping client state on the server is stupid, and I would not disagree with you, but it's not exclusive locks. If you had to deal with exclusive locks with TFS, somebody deliberately turned on that mode and should be slapped around for being an idiot.

Re:1st step. (1)

styrotech (136124) | about a year and a half ago | (#42748103)

oh yes, Microsoft Source Safe can scale upwards to a planet-wide kernel development effort. If I remember from my employer who used it, it only started showing problems at over twelve users......bwhahahahaha!

12 users? That's doing pretty well. Lots of people ran into trouble with way less than that.

VSS must've been one of the worst MS products in history. It was the kind of crap you'd expect Computer Associates to ship.

Re:1st step. (2)

smitty_one_each (243267) | about a year and a half ago | (#42746125)

The GPL and the Git community are going to break Mr. Softy somewhere around step #2.

Re:1st step. (4, Funny)

grcumb (781340) | about a year and a half ago | (#42746255)

The GPL and the Git community are going to break Mr. Softy somewhere around step #2.

Yep. First it's Git, then it's Microsoft GCC, then there's the Apache Solution Server and before too long they're selling Aladdin - The Microsoft LAMP Solution.

"New LAMPs for old! New LAMPs for old!"

ducks, runs....

Re:1st step. (1)

binarylarry (1338699) | about a year and a half ago | (#42746371)

It's a whole new world!

Re:1st step. (1)

David Gerard (12369) | about a year and a half ago | (#42748223)

Microsoft already ships gcc with Interix.

Re:1st step. (3, Insightful)

GigaplexNZ (1233886) | about a year and a half ago | (#42746431)

There's nothing stopping Microsoft from modifying their copy of libgit2 as long as they release the source according to the modified GPL license it is covered by. In fact, Microsoft already have upstreamed some modifications.

Re:1st step. (4, Interesting)

mcrbids (148650) | about a year and a half ago | (#42747421)

What makes no sense to me is why they'd use *Git* which is almost hostile towards the Windows platform, and not embrace Mercurial which has always been friendly to Windows users, offers capabilities similar to Git, and is designed more for ease of use and data integrity.

Git is all fine and well, but any VCS that includes both "history rebasing" and "garbage collection" as part of its commit history management, in my opinion, violates the very point of a VCS - to keep track of what was done by who, when. I'll pass, thanks, even if I do have a ton of respect for Linus.

So, Microsoft, why Git?

Re:1st step. (5, Insightful)

slimjim8094 (941042) | about a year and a half ago | (#42747545)

Why do you think garbage collection is related to "keeping track of what was done by who, when"? All it does is clean up files that are no longer part of the commit tree; that is, unreachable and "garbage". A way to create such a file is to 'git add' a file (which puts that specific version in the repo, for later commit) and then make another change. Since it's a different file than it was, you have to re-'git add' it, which creates an entirely new object that is referenced by the eventual commit. Hence, the dangling useless object is garbage and should be cleaned up.

People have been complaining about rebasing for a long time, and there's some valid criticism of it, but given the above I'm not convinced your problems with it are properly understood.

Re:1st step. (3, Insightful)

phantomfive (622387) | about a year and a half ago | (#42747673)

I think it's an indication that git has won the popularity contest over mercurial, for better or worse.

Re:1st step. (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42747879)

They garbage collection has nothing to do with git as a version control system, it's basically an implementation detail that helps with performance.

And history rebasing is frankly extremely useful, and only ever used on work that no one else seen (unless you're crazy and want people to hate you). You are only ever going to rebase to clean up stuff in your own repository, so all it does is encourage you to commit more often since it doesn't need to be perfect and organized with pretty commit messages all ready for public consumption. You've gained negative from a VCS point of view if all you've done is discourage Bob from committing early and often just so you can know the exact steps taken by Bob when Bob was working in Bob's repository.

Re:1st step. (1)

smallfries (601545) | about a year and a half ago | (#42748089)

Why do you think that source control should be an audit of what each person did, rather than a view of how the software got to its current state?

Re:1st step. (2)

subreality (157447) | about a year and a half ago | (#42748219)

In my opinion git provides better history guarantees than most other VCSes. Everything in a branch's history is completely set in stone by the sha1 sum of that commit. You can rebase your own local work, but once it's pushed to somewhere other people will see your changes, they're nearly permanent - pushing a rebase forces everyone else to rebase onto your new tree; it is not done lightly, and it is not the kind of thing that results in the history of who did what when getting lost without being noticed.

Compare that to Perforce - you can 'p4 obliterate' a file, and its whole history is gone without a trace. Same deal with svn - they don't give you sharp tools, but you can still dump the repo, edit the dump to make some changes, and load it back up. The history disappears completely.

Rebase makes it easier to DO these things, but the sha1 sums guarantee that you can't change history without being noticed. That's a stronger guarantee than most of the centralized systems.

(Note that Mercurial sha1 tracking as well and thus has similar history guarantees; my comments on history integrity aren't a criticism of hg.)

Re:1st step. (1)

exomondo (1725132) | about a year and a half ago | (#42747125)

The GPL and the Git community are going to break Mr. Softy somewhere around step #2.

Why? This looks pretty much like what Apple does with XCode.

Re:1st step. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42746131)

Repeating this tired dumb meme is in the same category as Godwinning.

Re:1st step. (2)

fisted (2295862) | about a year and a half ago | (#42746191)

5. Fork.

Re:1st step. (3, Insightful)

Jackie_Chan_Fan (730745) | about a year and a half ago | (#42746321)

Slashdot.org readers hate microsoft no matter what. Its sad really how willfully ignorant zealots can be.

Re:1st step. (4, Funny)

OhANameWhatName (2688401) | about a year and a half ago | (#42746471)

Slashdot.org readers hate microsoft no matter what. Its sad really how willfully ignorant zealots can be.

That's because Slashdot.org readers have the sad tendency to generalise everything

Re:1st step. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42746975)

That's because Slashdot.org readers have the sad tendency to generalise everything

Not *all* Slashdot.org readers genera...oh, I get it.

GPL Breaks this process. (5, Insightful)

anwyn (266338) | about a year and a half ago | (#42747149)

The GPL restricts the "Extend" step so that Discontinue step is impossible.

Any derived work of something, like git, which is GPLed, must be GPLed. That means that if you fork, the main branch, the main branch is free to use your extensions. This makes it difficult for replacement to work.

Furthermore, if you try discontinue step, others are free to fork and continue. So discontinue does not work.

The GPL completely breaks the "Embrace. Step 2: Extend. Step 3: Replace. Step 4: Discontinue." process. Which is why it is hated.

Re:GPL Breaks this process. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42747525)

I bet Microsoft finds a way to soft-Tivo-ize git anyway.
"Something something ... DMCA ... something something... criminal charges ... something something."

Re:1st step. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42747207)

I don't see that MS has the influence to do that much anymore. Goodbye Microsoft, take your too-little-to-lateness and your lame Surface with you.

Re:1st step. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42747385)

I think microsoft is kinda trying a different approach with open source now.

Step 1: Embrace. Step 2: Fix the shit for the windows side. Step 3: Make the windows side the only side.

MS Really Embracing OSS? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42746067)

Git the heck out of here!

Re:MS Really Embracing OSS? (2)

davydagger (2566757) | about a year and a half ago | (#42746071)

can't beat 'em, join 'em

said the same thing aboue apple with OS X

except MS's terms are ironicly far more reasonable

Re:MS Really Embracing OSS? (1)

jampola (1994582) | about a year and a half ago | (#42746967)

This. It's a sad day where if I were forced to give up my Linux's and BSD's I'd feel more comfortable moving to Windows opposed to OSX.

Ironically I am posting this from an Macbook Pro running Debian :)

Re:MS Really Embracing OSS? (1)

slimjim8094 (941042) | about a year and a half ago | (#42747577)

Funny you're uncomfortable moving to OSX, since it is (essentially) a BSD. Though I suppose that means if you were forced to give up BSDs, you'd therefore be forced to give up OSX...

Re:MS Really Embracing OSS? (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42747653)

As with Windows, it's not the OS that is scary, it's the company behind the OS. Apple has always been a much more controlling and anticompetitive company than Microsoft, it's just that they never had any marketshare to abuse until recent years.

Re:MS Really Embracing OSS? (1)

Beefpatrol (1080553) | about a year and a half ago | (#42746987)

I don't think that is why Apple based OSX on various open BSDs. Apple is and always has been a hardware company. They don't make money on software by itself like Microsoft does. They sell laptops that would sell for $800 with Windows on them for $2000 because they are the only laptops that run OSX without all sorts of hacking. (Yes, there are other reasons, but 95% or more of the reason they keep selling those laptops for that price is due to OSX.) When Apple embarked on OSX, they were circling the drain. They knew they needed a complete OS rewrite; they needed an OS that did preemptive multitasking. (Even Windows did preemptive multitasking then.) Apple was never in competition with software companies.

They did the smartest thing they could have done, which was to put an Apple-style interface on a free, high quality implementation of an operating system that was more than powerful enough to hang with the industry leaders, well understood by geeks, and which contained, essentially, the reference implementation of the protocols that the internet runs on.

At that point, lots of people, especially geeks, (geeks had recently become cool,) wanted to buy a laptop that ran "UNIX" and that had fully supported hardware that "just worked".

Re:MS Really Embracing OSS? (3, Interesting)

benjymouse (756774) | about a year and a half ago | (#42747699)

They did the smartest thing they could have done, which was to put an Apple-style interface on a free, high quality implementation of an operating system that was more than powerful enough to hang with the industry leaders, well understood by geeks, and which contained, essentially, the reference implementation of the protocols that the internet runs on.

Were you around in 2001? I don't think "high quality" is a term anyone would use to describe those first versions of OS X. It was slow, user interface sluggish, riddled with kernel panics. Apple actually had to offer a free upgrade to 10.1 - which was still slow and sluggish but somewhat more stable. OS X eventually grew into a high quality OS, but those first versions were certainly not. Until Tiger it was kind of a joke, really.

Re:MS Really Embracing OSS? (2)

styrotech (136124) | about a year and a half ago | (#42748205)

MS is now feeling threatened by the way other large companies (eg Apple, Google etc) are now 'cooler' and can now influence the software development ecosystem via their mobile platforms.

Open Source no longer really seems as much of a threat to them, and there's no point fighting it any more. And with Apple and Google increasingly becoming less open and losing some respect with the open source community, MS probably feels that they need all the help they can get to help keep them relevant or influential outside enterprise IT.

Awww (2)

binarylarry (1338699) | about a year and a half ago | (#42746079)

But what really happened?

I bet Visual Source Safe ate the *real* Windows 8 and what was released was hastily put together over an ubercrunch weekend.

Re:Awww (1)

Jerslan (1088525) | about a year and a half ago | (#42746155)

You're thinking of Windows ME ;)

He Finally took my advice. Or is making Progress. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42746127)

http://futureoptimistnow.blogspot.com/2012/12/sent-this-letter-by-fedex-few-weeks-ago.html

Subject: Proposal for a Modern Distribution System

Dear Steve,

The current system in use to distribute Windows is highly dated. Outlined is a system, with pros and cons, that uses advanced encryption and checksums to ensure that each copy of Windows is perfect.

Use bittorrent protocol to distribute a free image of Windows
Create a static web page with a magnet link, allowing the user to download said image with a bittorrent client
Add a link to a rebranded version of “unetbootin” either by ftp or bittorrent protocol
Sell a USB flash device like the one enclosed with Windows branding

Pros:
Save money on server load costs; people will use the resources of the “swarm” instead of Microsofts
High level of integrity ( checksums, encryption)
Sales from usb devices
Eco-friendly with no plastic involved

Cons:
Uncontrollable distribution
Lawsuits from retailers? (cutting out the middleman and selling online)

Sub-proposals: (optional)

Recompile essential GUI components to integrate with new kernel
Allow user to choose between Windows XP GUI, Windows 7 GUI and Windows 8 GUI
Tailor each live image to individual markets, thus reducing the images size
Use WINE for backwards compatibility dating back to Windows 95

Conclusion:

The above outlined points would more than likely double Microsoft's stock within a short period of time. I realize these are major changes, but nothing ventured, nothing gained. Most of Microsoft's revenue is from deals cut with OEM partners pre installing a licensed version on each machine. Even if Windows was free, the majority of the population would still buy a new computer and thus pay Microsoft, versus downloading a torrent file and running the install themselves. Retain full copyright over the user experience and GUI components but use a world class free kernel for the backend. People would notice the difference in performance but still use the interface their comfortable with.

Putting a price on the software and making it a physical product makes Windows worthless. Upgrading the kernel and lowering the barrier of distribution would act as catalyst and make Windows Priceless and thus essential, like water, allowing continued market dominance. All in all, transcend your product from a toxic physical embodiment into a pure electronic eco-friendly one.

Call it “Windows Universe Edition” or some other hipster crap like that. People are bad with numbers.

PS: “Those who see the future, create the future.”

Git today (1)

abelb (1365345) | about a year and a half ago | (#42746139)

"Do more Microsoft GIT+" tomorrow.

Faith (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42746181)

I want to be optimistic about their Git integration. We are migrating towards Git at work, and I can only hope it will help my fellow Windows developers have some nice tools on par with what we (Mac devs) have (a.k.a. SourceTree).

I hope they integrate git-flow somehow...

Re:Faith (1)

Desler (1608317) | about a year and a half ago | (#42747239)

TortoiseGit has existed for years...

Re:Faith (1)

aztracker1 (702135) | about a year and a half ago | (#42748175)

TortoiseGit has to be the most painful experience I've had for simple workflows... google and the command line were easier.

As to the why... Github is the new hotness for FLOSS projects. 'nough said... Though about half my dev time is now using NodeJS in Webstorm...

Re:Faith (1)

Barryke (772876) | about a year and a half ago | (#42748349)

You should take a look at SmartGit and TortoiseGit.

Good (0)

Murdoch5 (1563847) | about a year and a half ago | (#42746183)

GIT is the best SCM software I've personally used. I fully support this move, there is no point on wasting money when you can a better version for free.

Lmftfy (1)

Milosch1 (969372) | about a year and a half ago | (#42746291)

Microsoft INVENTS Git For Development Tools. Community rejoices!

Re:Lmftfy (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42747241)

Late to the innovation party as usual. Oh well, they can still roll out the relevant after the fact patents. Overly vague patents software patents are cool. Some day they'll be worth something.

Don't they use Perforce internally? (1)

CockMonster (886033) | about a year and a half ago | (#42746355)

It's a pity there's no Open Source version of Perforce (yes, yes not everyone needs DVCS). They really panicked with the 2012 version though. I believe Google also use Perforce.

Re:Don't they use Perforce internally? (2)

VortexCortex (1117377) | about a year and a half ago | (#42746401)

(yes, yes not everyone needs DVCS).

Those... words. They stick like bullshit to my mind's shoe.
Everyone who doesn't need DVCS can simply use DVCS as centralized or local source control.

Re:Don't they use Perforce internally? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42746569)

There are plenty of scenarios where DVCS would be equivalent to taking a 10 pound sledgehammer to drive a penny nail. Get over your warped self important agenda and use the correct tool for the situation.

Re:Don't they use Perforce internally? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42746697)

It's the opposite. Git doesn't handle huge repositories, e.g. projects that are several times larger than the Linux kernel.

Git is perfect for small and medium sized projects, which constitute the vast, vast majority of projects. But it sucks for really huge repos. Submodules, obviously, are a hack which can't always be used to get around the problem.

Re:Don't they use Perforce internally? (2)

the eric conspiracy (20178) | about a year and a half ago | (#42747071)

Yes. Why don't they fix submodules? Everyone has some workaround to submodules. But nobody actually fixes it.

Re:Don't they use Perforce internally? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42747187)

Except git is basically simpler to use than all source control out there when it comes to decentralization. As in, it's easier to use git to get you running than TFS or SVN.

Re:Don't they use Perforce internally? (1)

aztracker1 (702135) | about a year and a half ago | (#42748187)

Sorry, but I have to disagree... Setting up SVN +TortoiseSVN on windows is pretty painless, and just works... Setting up a centralized Git repository is about like pulling teeth imho.

Re:Don't they use Perforce internally? (1)

sg_oneill (159032) | about a year and a half ago | (#42748423)

git init

How hard is that?

Perforce plugins... Egit (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42746429)

Is this new? Perforce has had Visual Studio plugins for donkeys years, in fact every source control systems I've ever used has integration into VS and Eclipse.

So they now have a GIT plugin? And Eclipse has had EGIT for years. So basically they've only just caught up with the competition in that area.

And they're marketing it as "Hey wow, Microsoft is totally embracing open source", when it should be "Microsoft finally catches up to Eclipse and adds support for one of the major development source control systems".

Amazing (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42746523)

It's amazing how one person can create the worlds most popular source code control system in his spare time while the herd of ass clowns in Redmond could only come up with the SourceSafe.

Re:Amazing (1)

UnknownSoldier (67820) | about a year and a half ago | (#42747249)

Microsoft _bought_ One Tree Software in 1994 who originally created SourceSafe.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Visual_SourceSafe [wikipedia.org]

Re:Amazing (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42747539)

Brian Harry also built SourceSafe at One Tree Software, and then was the lead on TFS.

Hardly 'embracing' (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42746669)

Sounds like they are going to use it internally. That still doesn't mean that you will be able to report bugs to MS developers.

Re:Hardly 'embracing' (1)

benjymouse (756774) | about a year and a half ago | (#42747799)

Sounds like they are going to use it internally. That still doesn't mean that you will be able to report bugs to MS developers.

Not likely. They already have TFS (or rather TFVS) which is pretty powerful. TFS is centralized and not based on a distributed model like Git. But each model has core advantages over the other.

Being centralized it is easier to create overview and centralize building, integrate with project management, testing, bug reporting etc. with TFS. But TFS is also focused on creating a single product and doesn't lend itself as easily to forking projects like Git does. TFS does branching and merging very, very well, but the central repository has to know about the branches, i.e. it is not so easy to create local ad-hoc branches.

Git is based on a decentralized model which is very, very good when you have a fluent number of products branching off from a repository. Git doesn't automatically expect a branch to be merged at some point, indeed the repository does not *know* about branches, it only knows about change/patch sets. However, the distributed model also means that there is no one central repository and you cannot use the repository to track *ongoing* work (who's working on what).

In some cases Git is better. In other cases the TFS model is better. If you have a distributed development model go with Git. If you have a very centralized development model go with TFVS.

Re:Hardly 'embracing' (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42748259)

If you have a really centralized style of development, go for Bazaar, which you can coax into running the central style, but still use as a DVCS.

This Bill's Solution ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42746703)

To steal GIT !

This act of thievery will in Bill's words, 'My Plan To Fix The Worlds Problems.' http://indepthafrica.com/bill-gates-my-plan-to-fix-the-worlds-biggest-problems/#.UQnmYY7CEfM

Each step that William B. Gates III takes toward a grave, a very deep gravel, a grave filled with gasoline and torches at ready to ignite, is a step closer to fixing the world's problems !

XD

Not a big deal. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42746801)

This means nothing more than that they recogize how widley it is used, and understand that they will sell more of their own products if those products play nicely with it.

Eat crow, Microsoft fags! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42746843)

Have to stay current, don't we?

Ha Ha (4, Funny)

the eric conspiracy (20178) | about a year and a half ago | (#42747103)

My boss is going to turn purple. He hates git & anything devised by Torvalds.

Re:Ha Ha (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42747495)

Well, then he deserves to suffer.

Re:Ha Ha (2, Funny)

symbolset (646467) | about a year and a half ago | (#42747863)

Is he a tall sweaty bald guy with excess enthusiasm? You would think they had told him already.

Re:Ha Ha (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42748283)

Also, did you see him throwing around chairs?

Re:Ha Ha (3)

Intellectual Elitist (706889) | about a year and a half ago | (#42748013)

Same thing here. Our project has been using git for years, much to the chagrin of the least common denominator middle managers in our department. They've been pushing hard to get rid of useful work tools with "funny names" under the guise of a common tools initiative that was always in the bag for Microsoft. This will really stick in their craw. I love it.

A younger generation at Microsoft (1)

joelwhitehouse (2571813) | about a year and a half ago | (#42747167)

Is a younger generation of developers influencing Microsoft? The last few rounds of college grads on the management fast track at MS have had time to play with git in high school, college, and even perhaps as a personal tool at work. Maybe their personal preferences are affecting the Microsoft feature set.

Re:A younger generation at Microsoft (1)

DarwinSurvivor (1752106) | about a year and a half ago | (#42747877)

No developer of any kind has been in charge of Microsoft since Bill stopped writing their code. Balmer may have chanted (literally) their name, but they still had no power what-so-ever.

Say it ain't so (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42747171)

Git has to be, hands down, the buggiest nightmare I've ever dealt with. Something, anything is better than Linus's evil spawn.

GIT certifications by Microsoft (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42747223)

Their ASP.NET certification now includes jQuery, the ballz of Microsoft to ask for something they didnt invent. Oh well, so it is..

zombies, Von Dutch, and git (1)

bcrowell (177657) | about a year and a half ago | (#42747251)

Zombies were cool. Then they got so overexposed that Homeland Security started making videos about the zombie apocalypse. Zombies are now as uncool as Von Dutch.

If MS is using git, it's obviously time to switch to something that is way newer, way cooler, and doesn't actually work.

OMG!!!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42747273)

OMG!!!! Microsoft is coming down with CANCER!!!! Quick someone get me a chair while I preform the ritual monkey dance. I. Love. This. Company! WHOOH!!!!!

I think that covers highlights.

No TFS? (1)

forgottenusername (1495209) | about a year and a half ago | (#42747479)

I'm still waiting for my formal apology from them. Such a turd they unleashed on the world - they quit using it internally on any sort of scale because it sucked, but continued selling it and a few places are still infested with it. Including legacy code at my shop.

Re:No TFS? (1)

jader3rd (2222716) | about a year and a half ago | (#42747587)

they quit using it internally on any sort of scale because it sucked

Part of the reason why is because the group that created TFS (DevDiv) views its target audience as lone wolf star programmers, working in their garage, just waiting to become to next big thing. It's in all of their vision documents, and all of the profiles they make up for most of their targeted audience. Since they needed to dogfood it, they got it scale by the 2010 release. It's core problem though, is that all of TFS's designers must have only worked in that group and don't know anything better. I swear they must be actively avoiding even thinking about any possible comparisons to competitors.

Re:No TFS? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42747611)

Awww, somebody needs a hug...

Just what we needed (-1)

symbolset (646467) | about a year and a half ago | (#42747897)

A version of Git that you can't get your data out of because it's in a proprietary format.

.GIT? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42748421)

No thanks!

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...