Talk:Team Foundation Server
|WikiProject Computing / Software||(Rated Start-class)|
I just added a link to SVNBridge in the See Also section, but suspect that this is better placed in the main article. SVNbridge provides a path for Subversion clients, especially on *nix and Mac, to access (read and write) TFS hosted revision control items. EasyTarget (talk) 15:06, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
- SVNBridge doesn't appear notable (nothing in the topic nor googling supports that), and the topic itself appears to have been the work of the developer. Tedickey (talk) 15:14, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
Architecture - Paragraph 2 "Most activity in Team Foundation Server revolves around a "work item"."
Quote - Architecture P2: "Most activity in Team Foundation Server revolves around a "work item"."
This is not correct - activity in TFS revolves around three distinct functions: Revision Control, work items and project portals. Work items can relate to a change set in the revision control system or documentation on the project portal; but, this is certainly not a requirement - each function can be used effectively independently of each other. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.108.40.206 (talk) 23:16, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
When do we go for TFS?
What is the minimul and maximum requirements that we should optimum for TFS.????
What are the benefits we will get using this tool????( some extent i understood)but still want more clarification —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.127.116.11 (talk) 07:03, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
Tone/content of article seems like a sales pitch
Discussion of TFS capabilities and architecture seems to be dominated by vendor claims. I don't think the article should be dominated by such material. External links to vendor pages would be a better alternative to the present lengthy exposition, and Wikipedia's ends would be better served by more history of the product and (as it becomes available) independent comparison to competing solutions. Hardmath (talk) 02:27, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
while i wouldn't say it's too much of a venders pitch, it doesn't have the standard Critisms and Comparasion I'ld expect. I think it would benifit greatly from them. --Oxinabox (talk) 03:03, 11 June 2011 (UTC)
- +1 on that one! Also almost all links and reference go to Microsoft's website--MarmotteiNoZ 00:19, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
- I, too, agree. Especially, I'd like to see a comparison of this with Microsoft's OTHER source code control system - Visual SourceSafe, since that article states that Microsoft internally prefers this product over that one. --Eliyahu S Talk 05:18, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
I love the way "gated check-ins" are billed as "unique", this is simply untrue, this concept is a bog standard feature in all code collaboration and ci systems, much like the one in use at wikipedia: https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/ . This tfs article is one long advertisement and really needs some objectivity and qualified contribution, ie. not coming from a ms pr sockpuppet ;) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.104.22.168 (talk) 07:22, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
This article is a disgrace to Wikipedia and should be reduced to a stub. It is flooded with marketing terms without giving any accurate information. There is not even a mention of basic version control features like file rename tracking, directory creation history. Mkaama (talk) 04:52, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
Request for History Section
Would someone please add a section, "History", in similar fashion to page "Microsoft Visual Studio": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Visual_Studio#History
Microsoft Team Foundation Server RTM does not necessarily follow Microsoft Visual Studio RTM. For example, TFS 2015, with a release date of August, 2015, compared with Visual Studio 2015, with a release date of July, 2015. Iokevins (talk) 04:20, 29 April 2016 (UTC)