Team Foundation Server overkill ?

Well SourceSafe is horrid, non-atomic, locks files rather than allowing collaberation and has a nasty tendancy to corrupt itself.

TFS on the other hand is atomic (i.e. if one file fails during a checkin the whole checkin is rolled back), allows developers to work on the same file at the same time (and merges changes on checking) and I've never seen it corrupt itself.

Yes it is a big leap, it needs a much beefier server and perhaps for source control it is overkill. But if you start using the issue tracking as well, then the automated builds and so on then suddendly you see why it needs so much more power and how useful it is.

Sure you can get the same facilities using open source software - I use SVN for my home source control because I don't have a big enough box for TFS, but then you have to start adding other bits like CruiseControl for continuous builds, Bugzilla for bug tracking, and so on, and they just don't fit as well together as TFS does.

TFS has a learning curve, and it's pretty steep in places, but frankly it's worth it. Even just to replace VSS to have a safer source control solution would be a good move, then start looking at the issue tracking, then builds, and so on. Gradually start making use of it, you don't have to use it all at once.

I don't think I'd put it on an existing server. A lot of MS products assume they're going to be the first on there and so do horrible horrible things to "Default Web Site". If you've deleted that, as most people do, then who knows what will happen. It also installs sharepoint, SQL databases and all other manner of things.

If you're going to use it, dedicate a box to it.

If all you want is source control that doesn't crash and corrupt itself look at SVN. There's even a windows version called VisualSVN Server which installs very easily.