Future of Vault, roadmap, Whidbey and Microsoft dirty tricks

DarrenS · Post by **DarrenS** » Fri Feb 27, 2004 12:48 pm

An interesting point that one of the guys here raised is what will happen when Microsoft launches the promised (threatened?) new version of Visual SourceSafe.

It wouldn't be unheard of for Microsoft to "accidentally" break the Visual Studio .NET SCC API, such that competitors' products (Vault...) no longer work with it. (Think Real Audio...)

What is SourceGear's strategy to make sure users who adopt Vault aren't left high and dry if Microsoft pulls some dirty tricks to force the adoption of the next generation of VSS?

ericsink · Post by **ericsink** » Fri Feb 27, 2004 1:11 pm

SourceGear has to be very careful about responding to questions like this one. I've lost count of the number of times we've signed NDAs with Microsoft. Asking us questions about Microsoft is a good way to get vague, content-free answers like the following:

SourceGear is a member of the Visual Studio Integration Program. All VSIP members receive access to a set of APIs which are specifically designed to support integration with Visual Studio. Microsoft has been continually improving this program for years, so it seems they care very much about fostering a diverse ecosystem of tools which are integrated with Visual Studio.

So all VSIP members are Microsoft partners. However, basically all VSIP members are also competing with Microsoft in one way or another. You should be asking yourself why Microsoft works so hard to provide integration APIs to dev tool vendors with which it competes.

I think you are probably worrying about the wrong things. Perhaps Microsoft has used "dirty tricks" against their competitors in other markets, or perhaps not. All I can say is that we've been working with the Visual Studio team for six years, and I have never seen this team use those kinds of tactics.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Fri Feb 27, 2004 1:30 pm

Thanks Eric - I understand you have to be careful, being in a symbiotic/competitive relationship with Microsoft.

You're right - I am asking myself why Microsoft would facilititate competition in that way...I realize you probably can't answer that but I am curious! My guess would be, they realize people are going to develop alternatives to VSS anyway, so they might as well ease the integration with Visual Studio - that way, it might help sway people who are turned off by VSS into buying Visual Studio anyway.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Fri Feb 27, 2004 3:34 pm

There are good reasons why MS would create an open API for Visual Studio.

There are a wide range of Source Control products that target different markets (ie: vss is fine for small groups). MS doesn't want to limit VS to only customers that meet the limited vss target market.

ToAoM · Post by **ToAoM** » Fri Apr 09, 2004 6:55 am

Is Vault 2.01 supposed to work with Visual studio whidbey? I tried it, but can't get it to work

lbauer · Post by **lbauer** » Fri Apr 09, 2004 7:29 am

We generally don't support products until they are in final release. See this thread for more info:

http://support.sourcegear.com/viewtopic.php?t=167

dan · Post by **dan** » Fri Apr 09, 2004 8:05 am

ToAoM wrote:Is Vault 2.01 supposed to work with Visual studio whidbey? I tried it, but can't get it to work

It currently does not work. We will be supporting this before it is officially released, but don't yet have a timeframe - we need more time to dig into it.

ToAoM · Post by **ToAoM** » Sat Apr 10, 2004 6:04 am

One other thing I noticed is that the setup script can't register the vault db in yukon, so 've installed it on sql server 2000 which works fine (just testing)

Post by **jclausius** » Sat Apr 10, 2004 9:41 am

ToAoM wrote:One other thing I noticed is that the setup script can't register the vault db in yukon, so 've installed it on sql server 2000 which works fine (just testing)

Yes, we need to take a look at the script under Yukon. This has previously been reported: