I was looking through the MC 3.1 beta fixes and probably like most users trying to figure out if the bugs I had reported might have been in the fix list. Being a database programer of about 10 years experience (non direct pro since the programming has all been about programming for my own trading) I could see where the many-to-many link of file relationships would be needed to properly report bug status. Here it is in rough form as I see it.
File: Bug being investigated and/or fixed master file
key
desc
notes
status
File: Link file for many to many relationship.
key
BugMaster_LookUp (a pointer to the key on the file above)
User_LookUp (a pointer to the user file who reported the bug)
File: User Master
Key
User Name, info etc.
So making the links would be a fair bit of work even when the software was really very slick. Praying for more time and energy may help [[[ both ! and
get added to that sentence]]]. On that last note, for sure, whoever is receiving the bug reports would have to know the "bugs currently in process" well, do a quick search and get back to the user with the bug number they selected and make the link update. The simpler option is just have a bug master file and send the number back in the email reply and it is up to the user to remember it rather than the user going into their link file records to find the bugs they had reported on a database published to the web (via this link they could see the status of the bug they reported). New reportings of new bugs would not have a number yet. Three user may have reported the same bug in different wordings. Mathching these up may be a challenge. However such a database may make this process become a finely pollished routine (force us into a new efficient habit).One question? What releases of what software are currently able to publish to the web? I gather MS-Access started this with the 2000 release. Is this correct? Maybe this question should be posted to "www.utteraccess.com" or "http://www.tek-tips.com/" which have MS-Access forums.
John.