When creating the migration script if the developer goes through "cherry-picking" the commit(s) that they wish to include in the migration script. It appears that non-selected commits that are between the selected ones are being picked up.
For example if the developer chooses commit 1 and 3 and skips 2 the objects in commit 2 are still showing in the migration script.

I would like to point out that this appears to be a bug and not a feature request, but i am still using 3 votes...

Disable Foreig Keys of table of transaction

Suggest that the SSCv3 installer NUKE all prior version Log folders e.g., SSCv2 and SSCv1, please...(or at least offer us the choice to have them nuked...) Had Stuart not posted (at http://redgate.uservoice.com/forums/39019-sql-source-control/suggestions/2526239-log-files), I'd have those two folders around for ever...

When clicking the "Add a Migration Script" link on the Commit Changes tab, the TFS url and port are read only. As we use TFS on port 80 instead of port 8080, we cannot use this feature.

The same applies when setting up the link on the Setup tab.

Just view the tables checked as static.
Comes in handy when comparing to other Databases (hence same database but for instance on another level -> DEV-TST-ACC-PRD)

It would be great if you could add just a migrations script to your source control without any related change to any object in the database. This would be very use ful when tyou have tabel A with column 1 and 2 and i column 2 you want to replace all 'A' with 'a' or something.

A table is under source control and the data of that table is linked as static data.
Both table definition and data has been changed and are visible in the 'Commit changes' tab.
Since the data is just edited and changed for development purpose it should not be committed.
But in this situation it is impossible to only commit de table definition.
When checking the table the data is also checked (and the other way around also).

It would be nice to be able to commit the changes separetly.

You software goes out and looks for a update every time it's started and then pops up a little notice. When I clicked on this thinking I was getting an update to my existing software, it installed a new trial version and uninstalled my older licensed version. This is not only irritating, I think it is underhanded and reprehensible.

It would be mint* to be able to have SQL Server Maintenance jobs included in SQL Source Control. Could it be added as a new feature?

* (see kid from Super8 movie)

Support for Analysis Services Databases

With a team of 6 using source control, we are finding the performance of both SSMS on individual machines and our developement SQL box to be crippled by Source control.

Our developement server is showing literally hundreds of connections to TempDB from Sql source Control which is slowing the box considerably

On the commit tab, if I select any row where changed by is not me a warning appears at the top "Some of the changes may not have been made by you"

This has the effect of pushing everything down the screen and what was under the mouse is now moved.

This is extremely annoying, it would be better to have the warning appear in a dedicated area of the screen that doesn't cause it to change.

I would like a way for SQL Source control to leverage TFS work item status and facilitate automated deployment similar to lab management.

We have a partition scheme setup using a function

CREATE PARTITION SCHEME [partitionSchemeSystemId]
AS PARTITION [partitionFunctionSystemId]
TO ([PRIMARY], [PRIMARY], [PRIMARY], [PRIMARY], [PRIMARY], [PRIMARY], [PRIMARY], [PRIMARY], [PRIMARY], [PRIMARY], [PRIMARY], [PRIMARY], [PRIMARY], [PRIMARY], [PRIMARY], [PRIMARY], [PRIMARY], [PRIMARY], [PRIMARY], [PRIMARY])

when SourceControl has populated SVN it has added an extra partition to the scheme

Sourcecontrol sees these as being the same between the DB used to populate SVN but when we link a new instance of the database to sourcecontrol it identifies a conflict

We're using CA's SCM for our source control. Would be nice if SQL Source Control could add support for it.