Version control in QC is rudimentary and strictly linear. It does not support branching your source controlled items to have multiple versions active in parallel. If you need to work with a previous version of an item, you have to check out that version, and then that becomes your new, current version of that item (top of trunk).
Prior to QC v11 (or v10?) there was some support for integrating QC with third party version control systems. That is no longer supported.
I think it would be extremely challenging to try to use QC to manage your QTP artifacts and also try to implement Clearcase version control of the individual artifacts at the same time.
Regarding putting the QTP artifacts directly into Clearcase, I have heard of folks using third party version control for QTP without integrating QC. I think this is also challenging because of the funny directory structure QTP creates for tests in the file system. Making sure you have all the correct artifacts in version control, and making sure you get the ones you need out again, appears to be its own challenge.
(Opinions and information contained in this post are wholly my own and do not reflect the opinions of my employer.)
I've had some success with 3rd party version control and QC/QTP...however, the way the framework was designed the actual scripts(function libraries) were stored on a network drive and that was under version control. What was in QC was just a one line call to a driver script so that didn't need version control within QC.
Trying to make 3rd party version control work with scripts stored in QC would be unnecessarily tricky. You'd have to apply it to the file structure of the tests on the QC server itself(and everyone working on scripts would need write access to that server) or just not have the live versions under control and have to manually copy over the latest version to QC.
While QC's version control concept is quite dated, I would recommend just using that over a 3rd party.
Last edited by NoUse4aName; 09-11-2014 at 01:04 PM.