From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 2523 invoked by alias); 8 Jul 2008 13:40:21 -0000 Received: (qmail 2511 invoked by uid 22791); 8 Jul 2008 13:40:20 -0000 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Tue, 08 Jul 2008 13:39:48 +0000 Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m68DdkWf014672; Tue, 8 Jul 2008 09:39:46 -0400 Received: from pobox.corp.redhat.com (pobox.corp.redhat.com [10.11.255.20]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id m68DdjCj019346; Tue, 8 Jul 2008 09:39:45 -0400 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (sebastian-int.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.221]) by pobox.corp.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id m68DdipY027786; Tue, 8 Jul 2008 09:39:45 -0400 Message-ID: <48736E1B.4060109@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 08 Jul 2008 13:40:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.14 (X11/20080501) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Elena Zannoni CC: frysk Subject: Re: C++ debugger mailing list References: <486E887B.9020707@redhat.com> <48726570.6060902@oracle.com> In-Reply-To: <48726570.6060902@oracle.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.58 on 172.16.52.254 X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact frysk-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: frysk-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2008-q3/txt/msg00006.txt.bz2 Elena Zannoni wrote: > Andrew Cagney wrote: >> I'd like to propose that discussions and planning for this new >> project (or rebooted frysk as some have called it) be on a dedicated >> mailing list (it can be bootstrapped using frysk's membership), and >> then we extend a hand to gdb@ developers inviting them to participate. >> >> I think an invitation to interested gdb developers to something >> clearly not frysk and not gdb, would be a strong symbolic gesture to >> all concerned that the intent here is inclusion. >> >> Andrew >> >> > > Can somebody elaborate? > We'd like to participate in these ongoing discussions for the new > project, whatever that is. The goal of the frysk project is to implement an allways on monitoring and debugging tool, with key focus points being visual or graphical interface, non-stop and saleability. And in particular, to not just re-implement GDB. This drove decisions such as language choice and architecture, directions and goals, and also the decision to start with a relatively clean slate. Red Hat have decided to withdraw their support for the frysk project and its goals, and are now instead focusing their efforts on a more clearly and narrowly defined goal of implement the Best C++ debugger, and in C++. Tom is leading this new effort. This of course leads us to a number of questions that I'm sure you're too familiar with (having struggled with them at the start of the frysk project): -> do you start a new community around a new code base -> do you fork an existing community and code base; GDB or frysk -> do you work with an existing community, in particular GDB A lot has changed over the last few years; for instance GOLD; GCC moving to C++; and GDB's increased level of activity and functionality. An evaluation of the above in light of this new environment, is important. Finally, a mistake I must recognize with frysk was not trying to engage the GDB community, and I look forward to seeing that mistake redressed with this new effort; and that I guess is my motivation for proposing a neutral discussion ground. Shall we set something up, gdb++ frysk++ ...?