>Hi
>
>Can I have your views on version control.
>
>I have a live version of my app (2.2) and a new version I am working on @ the moment (3.0) and I keep both copies in seperate directories under seperate VFP projects.
>
>I find it a pain if I make some bug fixes in 2.2 and then have to copy the relevant fixes over to 3.0.
>
>Am I doing this the right way or am I doing it all wrong, it does work, but I wanted some opinions as to how you guys might be handling versions of software.
>
>Comments greatly appreciated.
>Thanks
>Kev

Kev,
I'll agree with the others who posted that using some type of source control is the way to go. I've used VSS and PVCS and I would recommend VSS (6) over PVCS (6.5) in a heartbeat. I think the interface is better and there are more features.

Having said that, I don't think source control will help much in this case. You are trying to maintain two distinct versions of your product (2.2 and 3.0). Presumably 3.0 has more functionality so you have modified classes/programs/forms in 3.0 to make it different than 2.2. If a user finds a bug in 2.2 and you correct it in the 2.2 codebase, you then have to search in the 3.0 codebase to to see if you have already corrected it or you have to incorporate it.

Source control would not alleviate this problem. The underlying problem is that you are still maintaining two codebases. Just to play devil's advocate, are the bugs that users are finding 2.2 "drop dead"? Are work arounds available? If so, then I would recommend telling your users that you are working on the next release and the bug will be fixed in that release. That way you only have to work on one codebase.

If the bug is a "drop dead" bug, then source control pays for itself. You could check out the version labeled 2.2 into a separate directory, make the change, recompile and distribute the new 2.2 version. Then you need to relabel the files using the previous label ID (2.2 or whatever). VSS will use the new files in the label. The next time you need to check out version 2.2, you'll have the latest version. You then need to incorporate that change into the 3.0 codebase but the frequency of that occurring is less than the other way.

Just my opinion.