We have a few team members that have been working at software for a very long time and are not used to the idea of a version control system. These people are fairly good at what they do but can't get past organizing all of their work into files and folders. This wouldn't be so bad if there was at least some sort of naming convention that gave some idea of how the different revisions were organized. Things really got out of hand when we needed to see what was changed from a previous version that caused a problem in a fairly large program.
I tried explaining some of the concepts of revision control but got some push-back... The person who I tried to get to use revision control told me some of the following:
- Why should more than one version go in 1 location?
- Each version should be a new project.
- Each version should be frozen in time so nobody can change it.
I tried arguing #3 that you could protect the revisions in a bare repository (say with Git for example) on a remote drive, but the argument just didn't take... Not really sure how to argue against 1 and 2, that sort of makes sense to me. How can I explain why revision control is a good idea?
I saw the following question, which is sort of related but I can't convince these guys to use any version control system in the first place...