Board index » delphi » Re: Delphi 8 doesn't work with some Developer Express components

2004-01-05 05:30:09 AM
delphi133
Derek Davidson writes:
is to give the other side the benefit of the doubt, until such time as
facts emerge which clarify the situation for better or worse.
I know feelings are running high over this issue, and for me,
personally, the problems in the IDE are important and have meant that I
will not be recommending a DevEx subscription for the moment.
Nonetheless, I am confident that JK is sincere that he (or the others
in the official communication channel) did not know about the problem,
and that he is taking steps to find out just what happened.
All we can do is to wait to see what steps will be taken to resolve the
situation, and to offer any technical discoveries which may be relevant.
--
Carl
 

Carl Caulkett writes:
--
Carl
 

correction here.
Attributes are not necessarily inherited. You can easily create a custom
attribute that is not inherited by applying an AttributeUsageAttribute to it
and setting its Inherited property to false.
System.ComponentModel.Component does *not* get the SerializableAttribute
inherited from System.MarshalByRefObject. If you check
System.SerializableAttribute in the .NET Reflector (mscorlib) you will see
that it is AttributeUsageAttribute is set not to inherit.
--
Best Regards,
Dustin Campbell
Developer Express, Inc.
 

"Carl Caulkett" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes
completely sane until I peeked inside System.Reflection. ;-)
Dave
 

"Carl Caulkett" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>wrote
efforts (along with TeamB's, JK's and DevEx's) to resolve the issue Carl !
JoeH
 

Ed Dressel writes:
entries entered, and longer still before product groups inside Borland
started seriously trying to use it, but that has happened over that past
year or so - Borland teams *are* using it. Continuing to refuse using it
helps no-one.
--
Wayne Niddery - Logic Fundamentals, Inc. (www.logicfundamentals.com)
RADBooks: www.logicfundamentals.com/RADBooks.html
"It is error alone which needs the support of government. Truth can
stand by itself." - Thomas Jefferson
 

Wayne Niddery [TeamB] writes:
figure out it was worth anything ....
--
Derek Davidson
www.enterpriseblue.com
 

Derek Davidson writes:
of course this can happen for other products too. But it still remains that
the newsgroups are not and never have been official Borland support groups,
they are strictly peer-supported groups. Any involvement by Borland
personnel is by their own initiative (but of course highly encouraged by all
of us) and thus cannot in any way be considered a proper or reliable way to
report bugs (to discuss them generally is perfectly proper, but not to
*report* them to Borland).
It still remains that Borland has provided *official* means for the public
to report bugs (QC), and several people have worked hard to get QC up and
running and to get Borland's development teams to buy into it (which they
have very much at this point). So it is self-defeating to continue resisting
that official means and "taking your chances" hoping newsgroup postings will
be acted on.
It also remains that Borland partners also have *another* official means of
reporting problems and it is even more ridiculous that any partner would
apparently choose not to use those means and try to go around it somehow.
problems!
QC was a *response* to this very real problem - not having an easy way to
officially report bugs. So what I see now is a refusal to use a system that
was created precisely to solve this very problem, and then complaints that
Borland refuses to solve the problem!
--
Wayne Niddery - Logic Fundamentals, Inc. (www.logicfundamentals.com)
RADBooks: www.logicfundamentals.com/RADBooks.html
"It is error alone which needs the support of government. Truth can
stand by itself." - Thomas Jefferson
 

Ed Dressel writes:
--
Nick Hodges (TeamB)
Lemanix Corporation - (www.lemanix.com)
 

Wayne Niddery [TeamB] writes:
to the trouble of entering it into QC.
themselves were resisting using QC.
entered into QC to get noticed. For whatever reason, Borland didn't
get the message about the problem with third party component sets (I'm
choosing my words very carefully). I, for one, am content to see how
it all washes out.
I know - we're such {*word*76}y rebels us developers, aren't we? Someone
goes to all that trouble and we can not be arsed to use it. Tch! What can
you do?
</SARC>
bug here (manifestly not true, but let's play it your way). I HAVE to
use QC. You are requiring me to use a device to make things easy for
Borland. Not for me. But for Borland. This same device gives no feed
back and exhibits evidence that reports have been totally ignored for
over two years. To top it all, Borland themselves didn't even use it
at first.
Yes, sure. I would say that is a very strong barrier to communication. But
here's the biggest thing, Wayne: Communication requires a two-wayflow
of information. Ignoring a report is NOT communication. Failing to
act on a report for over 2 years is NOT communication.
So yes. Again, I would say that is a big barrier to communication.
Maybe it will get better? We can all hope.
bugs the Borland way and STILL get ignored. All they appear to have
done is put another barrier in the way.
--
Derek Davidson
www.enterpriseblue.com
 

Howdy Nick:
of us are not privy to) could you agree that it is long overdue?
Ed Dressel
 

Ed --
I agree with most of what you've said. Borland should pay attention to
QC, and should use it more.
However, they do have a long-standing, working system of tracking bugs
that they weren't, for whatever cultural reasons, anxious to abandon.
Slowly but surely, QC is being integrated into the whole process. For
instance, it it now part of the standard install for JBuilderX. If you
had any idea how much work and sweat John Kaster put into breaking the
resistance to such a thing, you'd be far more appreciative of QC (and
John) than you probably are.
So, I think we all agree that QC could be better. But of course it
won't be better if people ignore it.
Bottom line -- if you want Borland to listen to your bug reports and
fix them, put them in QC. that is +the best+ thing you can do.
--
Nick Hodges (TeamB)
Lemanix Corporation - (www.lemanix.com)
 

Derek Davidson writes:
resisting using it at all. It turns out that the early adopters were the
InterBase team. You are reading things into Wayne's statement that flat out are
not true. There has been no resistance from the R&D or QA teams to using QC.
--
Jeff Overcash (TeamB)
(Please do not email me directly unless asked. Thank You)
If there is somebody up there could they throw me down a line. Just a
little helping hand just a little understanding. Just some answers to the
questions that surround me now. If there's somebody up there could
they throw me down a line. (Fish)
 

enough to see something fixed to get some enthusiasm from the Delphi users
before we endorse it--rather then expecting the community to keep entering
issues that have been all but ignored.
issue is something different.
What you state is exactly the problem with QC: product groups at Borland
could/should have started using it as soon as it was online so that there
wasn't this preception (or reality as the case is) that they weren't even
looking at it. Or it should have been clear up front: the request to enter
bugs at QC should have included the disclaimer that product groups would
come on line when there was a significant number (somewhere around 2000 of
them? I am not sure how to count).
And if the next update/version to Delphi does include fixes to issues at QC,
why isn't QC being updated with that information (e.g. "issue fixed in next
release of Delphi"). The communication break down has not been with the
product users (who have entered over 2000 Delphi issues to date), it has
been from the Borland side.
Ed Dressel
 

David --
Bottom Line -- if you have a bug, and you want Borland to know about
it, put a good, complete report in QC. There is +no other reliable
way+ to let them know.
If you +don't+ want them to fix it and you want to complain that bugs
you find aren't fixed, then +don't+ put it in QC. That way Borland
probably won't know about it and won't fix it.