[ChrisMarshallNY]

I remember a similar argument against Visual SourceSafe[0].

We had been using SS since it was done by OneTree (borged by MS).

MS used an internal tool, instead.

VSS did do one cool trick, which I have yet to see replicated elsewhere: You could construct "artificial workspaces," composed of elements (down to individual files) in other workspaces, so, when you checked out (it was all checkout/checkin, back then), you actually checked out from (and back into) the original workspace.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Visual_SourceSafe

[christophilus]

Is git worktree close enough? In the past, I’ve used it roughly the way you describe.

[ChrisMarshallNY]

I don't think I've tried that.

Thanks for the heads-up.

[UPDATE] Ah. Now I remember [0]

It does roughly that, but it still insists on bringing in the entire repo (as does all Git).

The thing that SS did, was allow you to create a "chimera" workspace, composed of just tiny parts of other workspaces.

It was a great way to share sample and SDK stuff, without, for example, sending over a ton of testing code.

Many of my repos have more testing code than implementation code; not to mention a ton of documentation.

[0] https://git-scm.com/docs/git-worktree

[malodyets]

Svn externals provide similar capabilities, though I don’t remember if an external can be an individual file. TortoiseSvn on windows made it not to painful to use.

https://svnbook.red-bean.com/en/1.7/svn.advanced.externals.h...

[denton-scratch]

Externals is a footgun that can cause nasty injuries. I like Svn, but I won't be using Externals again.

[fanf2]

The main criticism I heard of Visual SourceSafe was that if your repository got bigger than 2GB it would be irretrievably corrupted.

I understand it used the same storage engine as a number of other Microsoft products, including Exchange, which had the same bug.

[ChrisMarshallNY]

It was awful.

It was a straight file-based system; run entirely from the client. No server component.

You mounted a server drive onto your desktop, pointed VSS at it, and then fixed a four-course meal, while it synced.

No server. For a shared VSS.

I’m not surprised MS didn’t use it.

[stevekemp]

My memory of VSS was that it locked files while you were making changes, and that stopped your colleagues from editing those files until you were done.

That, and the slow speed, were my two memories of the product. But I admit the last time I used VSS was back in 1996, or so.