>I now believe this is a foxbin2prg issue, because the problem with checkin comments longer than 40-50 chars only occurs on a binary file that is run thru foxbin2prg. A .prg file does not have the problem.
>
>Why in the world would foxbin2prg work perfectly under all circumstances unless a checkin comments is a certain length? Then it failes and loses data. Multiple checkins, every feature of VSS/SoSis fine except for this.
>
>What does foxbin2prg have to do with checkin comments? Does it read them in any way?
>

Tuvia, do you really think that have any way to know what do you write in the comment in a tool (SoS) that I don't have nor use?

I think that you are wrong on your believe about FoxBin2prg. The tool only convert binary to text and text to binary, nothing less, nothing more. If SoS have problems with comments, then SoS support should tell you what can be wrong, may be SoS doesn't accept checking in binaries, I don't know this SCM, just the name.

Have you tested any of the solutions I've proposed?

Have you tested configuring FoxBin2Prg in "one way" mode to do the same as SccTextX (generate only text)?

How can you tell that is FoxBin2Prg issue without a testable case? And how can I test it, if I don't have your SCM tool (which is not free)?

Your message is a non-sense at all! Really, take your time and think reasonably:


1) >I now believe this is a foxbin2prg issue, because the problem with checkin comments longer than 40-50 chars only occurs on a binary file that is run thru foxbin2prg. A .prg file does not have the problem.

I believe this is a SoS problem, may be with binaries or under some circinstances. FoxBin2Prg knows nothing about the SCM tool you are going to use, is just a conversor.


2) >Why in the world would foxbin2prg work perfectly under all circumstances unless a checkin comments is a certain length?

If FoxBin2Prg can convert any of your binaries out of your SCM tool, and from inside your SCM tool too: What have this to do with the Comments??
Isn't more reasonable to think that SoS have a problem with it? May be related to checking in binaries? Whe are talking about a limitation of SoS comments here
Don't you think that the problem could by that SoS do not have a good support of external tools that can regenerate binaries, and may be only support tools that generate only text? => That's why I've said to test it configuring FoxBin2Prg as "one way" to generate only text, as you do with SccText, using all support option to "1"


3) >What does foxbin2prg have to do with checkin comments?

Absolutely nothing.


4) >Does it read them in any way?
No, it doesn't. Doing something like this requires knowing every SCM/DVCS tool in the world and hooking their interface or have a way to do that.


I think you should know better the internals of SoS about interfacing with external tools, and ask your support about this (if there is any support)
I can try to help you in any FoxBin2Prg testable case, but interaction with SCMs and DVCSs are out of my knowledge and time.

May be you can wait for others using SoS to comment, or ask to other people using SourceOfSite + FoxBin2Prg how they use it. I know that few of them participate on Foxite forums (http://foxite.com/forum/), or in Google Thor forum (http://groups.google.com/group/foxprothor).


Regards.-