Board index » cppbuilder » You get 5 QC votes for each product so use up all your BCB QC votes

You get 5 QC votes for each product so use up all your BCB QC votes


2004-04-07 07:53:36 AM
cppbuilder10
You get 5 votes on BCB and 5 other votes on BCBX. If you haven't used up all your BCB
votes then please do so. Someone from Borland indicated in the bcbx non-technical
group that that there some people in Borland who would like to resurrect BCB.
For BCB I voted on 3 linker bugs:
qc.borland.com/wc/wc.exe/details
qc.borland.com/wc/wc.exe/details
qc.borland.com/wc/wc.exe/details
and for Athlon 64 compatibility
qc.borland.com/wc/wc.exe/details
and for a longer list of most recently used projects:
qc.borland.com/wc/wc.exe/details
One thing strikes me about BCB and QC: there are BCB bugs that I hit that are not
reported there. Also, some of the complaints I've seen here do not seem to have QC
entries. If anyone here has BCB problems that are not listed they ought to go put
them into QC.
For instance, every time I first start up BCB and try to build I get an internal
compiler error in my project's _IMPL.cpp file. I have to first compile a few other
files before trying to to a Make that will compile the _IMPL.cpp file. But I don't
see that one mentioned.
I've had other problems with BCB that would be hard to reproduce that I have also not
reported. There is a kind of "project hell" I've gotten into where the internal state
of the project has gotten so munged I've had to roll back to a back-up version. I
don't know what to say to reproduce that and so I wonder what the point would be of
opening a QC entry on it.
One reason to report and vote on BCB bugs in QC at this point is to let Borland know
why existing BCB users will have a problem to continue using BCB if BCBX does not get
a Win32 VCL forms designer, CodeGuard, and anything else that BCB users rely on that
are not in BCBX. It can't hurt to go use up all your BCB votes in Quality Central.
 
 

Re:You get 5 QC votes for each product so use up all your BCB QC votes

Let me amend this. I dropped 6073 because it was fixed in SP4. So I added:
qc.borland.com/wc/wc.exe/details
Though you could also try:
qc.borland.com/wc/wc.exe/details
Randall Parker wrote:
Quote
For BCB I voted on 3 linker bugs:
qc.borland.com/wc/wc.exe/details
qc.borland.com/wc/wc.exe/details
qc.borland.com/wc/wc.exe/details
and for Athlon 64 compatibility
qc.borland.com/wc/wc.exe/details
and for a longer list of most recently used projects:
qc.borland.com/wc/wc.exe/details


 

Re:You get 5 QC votes for each product so use up all your BCB QC votes

"Randall Parker" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in
message news:40734382$ XXXX@XXXXX.COM ...
Quote
Someone from Borland indicated in the bcbx non-technical
group that that there some people in Borland who would like to resurrect
BCB.
Don't tease me. Who said what, and in which thread?
- Dennis
 

{smallsort}

Re:You get 5 QC votes for each product so use up all your BCB QC votes

See the thread "Why can't get CBX update?" in BCBX's non-technical and the post by
Robert Ehteshamzadeh who is in Borland C++ QA. It is from several hours ago.
Dennis Jones wrote:
Quote
"Randall Parker" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in
message news:40734382$ XXXX@XXXXX.COM ...

>Someone from Borland indicated in the bcbx non-technical
>group that that there some people in Borland who would like to resurrect

BCB.

Don't tease me. Who said what, and in which thread?

- Dennis