QC Sysop, please open QC #34652 or 29879

QC Sysop, please open QC #34652 or 29879

Post by Dennis Jon » Fri, 17 Nov 2006 04:02:20


To any QC sysop...

Please open QC reports #29879 and/or #34652 (#34652 is a duplicate of
#29879). They describe an obvious bug that is easily reproducible and
should be easy for Borland (er, um, CodeGear) to fix. Both reports have
been sitting idle for nearly two months, despite the fact that there has
been significant discussion in the "Comments" section for 29879.

Thank you,

- Dennis
 
 
 

QC Sysop, please open QC #34652 or 29879

Post by Dennis Jon » Thu, 23 Nov 2006 04:52:11


Do I need to ask again? What does one have to do to get reports opened?

- Dennis

 
 
 

QC Sysop, please open QC #34652 or 29879

Post by John Herbs » Thu, 23 Nov 2006 05:07:08


"Dennis Jones" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM > wrote

Dennis,
Next time, if you would make a little easier by giving
http://www.yqcomputer.com/
http://www.yqcomputer.com/
it might help a few more people to have a look.
Rgds, JohnH
 
 
 

QC Sysop, please open QC #34652 or 29879

Post by John Herbs » Thu, 23 Nov 2006 05:08:58

Oh, did I forget to mention -- Please give the title:
"bdsproj2mak: does not write libfile path (-l)"
--JohnH
 
 
 

QC Sysop, please open QC #34652 or 29879

Post by JED » Thu, 23 Nov 2006 06:39:53


Sorry Dennis I don't do C++Builder reports unless they are VCL related.


--
Compact Framework for Delphi 2006: http://www.yqcomputer.com/
QualityCentral Windows Client: http://www.yqcomputer.com/

Visual Forms IDE Add In: http://www.yqcomputer.com/
 
 
 

QC Sysop, please open QC #34652 or 29879

Post by Roddy Prat » Thu, 23 Nov 2006 07:12:10


You're doing the right thing by bringing them up here. I try and look
at all C++ reports that get entered, but I currently have no knowledge
about (or need for) BDSPROJ2MAK, so I've been leaving those reports for
others. However, if nobody else bites, I'll see if I can have a look at
them fairly soon.

- Roddy
 
 
 

QC Sysop, please open QC #34652 or 29879

Post by Dennis Jon » Thu, 23 Nov 2006 07:18:12


Personally, I prefer the QC app in Windows, so I never use the web client.
Though I don't know why it would make any difference to anyone, particularly
a sysop, I do appreciate the suggestion -- I'll try to remember it for
future reference.

- Dennis
 
 
 

QC Sysop, please open QC #34652 or 29879

Post by Leo Siefer » Thu, 23 Nov 2006 10:53:09


The win client has a "Copy to Clipboard" option in the Reports menu
that makes this very easy to do. Please note that sysops do have a
large number of reports to look through, and inclusion of the short
description in a posting here makes it much easier to filter.

- Leo
 
 
 

QC Sysop, please open QC #34652 or 29879

Post by Dennis Jon » Thu, 23 Nov 2006 16:59:44


Thanks Roddy.

I appreciate you folks (sysops) that do this (necessary) work. However, the
fact that sysops don't always have the necessary knowledge (or bandwidth) to
correctly process and open reports just underscores the importance of having
people at Borland with this responsibility. It's fine to have volunteers
help filter reports, but when a report sits idle for months at a time (and
there are many -- not just my half-dozen), it is a clear indication that the
sysops are unable to process the reports, for whatever reason, and the
responsibility should then ultimately fall on a Borland engineer or QA
member who can. It's ridiculous for Borland to pass off the job of
filtering to volunteers and then to ignore reports that never get opened by
those volunteers.

QC was a great idea, but it has been so poorly managed that it's just not
having the impact I think many of us had hoped.

- Dennis
 
 
 

QC Sysop, please open QC #34652 or 29879

Post by Roddy Prat » Thu, 23 Nov 2006 17:22:30


I totally agree. QC has to be a volunteer ASSISTED system, not a
volunteer-RUN one.

That's how I think it's always been meant to operate, but frankly it
doesn't seem to have worked that way in the past. Hopefully things like
the RAID/QC sync will help - as will David Dean's appointment. (But
secretly, I think Borland may have "bought him off" to stop him opening
any more reports ;-)


I'm holding off on that assessment until I see BDS2007. That really
should be the first release where QC will have really driven the bugs
and enhancements required.


- Roddy
 
 
 

QC Sysop, please open QC #34652 or 29879

Post by Sebastian » Thu, 23 Nov 2006 19:14:06

> I appreciate you folks (sysops) that do this (necessary) work. However,

There are a few Borlanders scanning QC. Craig Farrel probably being the most
active one if you look at the QC stats.


It could also be a clear indication that a lot of reports miss essential
info and that some reporters just post the report and then never come back.
I've had dozens of reports where I ask for more info or specific questions
and never hear back. That is obviously not the case for the reports you
mentioned.

So if you see a high quality QC which hasn't been tackled, feel free to post
a link here. That might also be a good idea if you can provide additional
info which a report currently lacks.


I'm afraid that's part of the reason why QC exists. So that QA can
concentrate on the bugs that are definitely reproducible and after
duplicates have been sorted out. Of course it would be nice if CodeGear
could hire half a dozen new QA engineers just to scan QC, but I doubt it's
going to happen.


Well, I think QC does its job pretty well in documenting and escalating
bugs. But that's only part of the equation, and doesn't help if R&D lacks
the time to actually fix the bugs. Let's hope that with the new CodeGear
that will change to the better. Posts from Nick certainly give that
impression, so I agree with Roddy; lets wait till Highlander hits the street
and reserve your judgement til then.

Cheers
 
 
 

QC Sysop, please open QC #34652 or 29879

Post by Roddy Prat » Thu, 23 Nov 2006 23:15:30


Oh. I hadn't realised Craig was a CodeGearer.

Sadly, I based that assumption on the (significant) amount that he
contributes to QC...

- Roddy
 
 
 

QC Sysop, please open QC #34652 or 29879

Post by David Dean » Mon, 27 Nov 2006 01:46:53


It may seem that way for the moment, but I hope that I'm back to my
usual rate before too long. <g>

I apologize to those who have been waiting on me to follow up on
reports, but I have been *very* busy for the last month.

--
-David Dean
CodeGear C++ QA Engineer
 
 
 

QC Sysop, please open QC #34652 or 29879

Post by David Dean » Mon, 02 Apr 2007 16:10:29

In article <456358e1$ XXXX@XXXXX.COM >,



You are now a level 1 sysop. You can mark reports for attention
directly. You can learn about your other abilities and what is expected
of a sysop here:

< http://www.yqcomputer.com/ ;

--
-David Dean
CodeGear C++ QA Engineer
< http://www.yqcomputer.com/ ;
 
 
 

QC Sysop, please open QC #34652 or 29879

Post by Brad Whit » Wed, 04 Apr 2007 23:18:40

Dennis,

As a new sysop, I suggest that you check out JED's client.
It has several features that are particularly helpful for sysops.
http://www.yqcomputer.com/