I am still confused as to how using scripts is better than using stored procedures and using a job with multiple steps to control the flow. Furthermore, in Sadequl's article, he specifically mentions that you cannot check for errors that occur between scripts, something that can be done with a job and you are controlling the flow of execution of the steps. You could add that, but then your code to execute code starts becoming complex, using pipes and FIND and branching (mind you extremely limited branching). Using a job, each step can branch to a completely different step if the executing step fails, thus customizing error handling.

I am also somewhat opposed to saying, "execute anything in the folder and always assume the last character of the filename (prior to the period) is the sort order". The code presented would attempt to execute a temp file, a text file, a backup copy of a current script, etc. At the very least, if I was going to implement this methodology, I would have a control table in SQL Server that specified the script name and order of execution. I could then pull the script name from that table in execution order. Then I could give my scripts meaningful names without worrying about them having the "correct" prefix or suffix.

I did not state, or even imply that backups are a method of version control. I stated that you can either integrate your version control software into SQL Server, or script the procedure and manually add updates to your version control (check out existing, check in changes). I was implying that backing up the database backs up the procedures.