Hi all,

I'm working on a project in which SCM is mostly limited to source code
access control using MS SourceSafe. My manager (in case he reads
this) is great at managing people, but he doesn't have a technical
(software engineering) background so when arguments flare up, he
doesn't necessarily know who is right.

The problems:

1. We are not using private work-spaces. I have tried to explain to
the other programmer that by using a common workspace we "step on each
other's toes", but he maintains that it is better to have a common
workspace. I told him that SourceSafe provides a "shadow directory"
that works as a sort of integration directory where the current stable
build can reside, but he refuses to budge.

2. Same programmer insists on creating a new project for each release.
I have tried to explain that we lose the historical continuity of
each file, but again, he insists that a clean break on each release is
better. I told him that we can use labels to identify baselines, but
he refuses to budge (this is a common theme). Another side-effect of
creating a new project for each build is that each "project" does not
contain all files that make up the system - instead, each "project"
only contains those files that changed during that particular build.

3. Same programmer insists that SQL stored procedures do not need to
be maintained in SourceSafe.

4. Same programmer insists that documentation (requirements, design
documents, etc.) do not need to be maintained in SourceSafe.

I argue that these are bad practices, other programmer (who,
incidentally, thinks an unrolled, nested loop is easier to maintain
than a nice, compact nested loop) thinks I am insane. Manager doesn't
know who to believe.

Help!

cj