So we should proceed that way:
- Put a big warning + the expression to switch debugger in the pharo-
dev
- then we follow what dale is saying
- I will produce a list of important features we need to have
-- copy stack
-- chase pointer
... in OT
Is is ok for your community?
Stef
Begin forwarded message:
> From: Dale Henrichs <[email protected]>
> Date: March 3, 2009 6:57:36 PM CEST
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: On the OTDebugger...
> Reply-To: [email protected]
>
> Steph,
>
> This note isn't about your 'disable OB-debugger for now message',
> but it is a response, of sorts to the ensuing discussion.
>
> If you want a '120% debugger' then folks working on Pharo need to
> use the debugger and eat their own dogfood. It's the only way to
> ensure that a tool like the debugger gets enough coverage to ensure
> that it is stable. With that said, I wouldn't want to commit to
> using a tool that was broken or that I couldn't depend upon.
>
> With that in mind, I am willing to commit to the following things:
>
> 1. fix any bugs or implement any features that are deemed as show
> stoppers with the current OTDebugger - i.e., the things that are
> preventing folks from getting work done today.
>
> 2. I also promise a quick response to any show stopper bugs that
> folks come across while doing development with the OTDebugger (or
> any other of the OB-Tools).
>
> I came to maintain the OB-Tools through the 'back door'. I use a
> branch the OB-Tools in GLASS and have decided to maintain the OB-
> Tools for the Squeak/Pharo community as a way to contribute back to
> the community. What that means specifically is that next to Lukas, I
> probably know more about the OB-Tools than anyone else, however, I
> don't have a laundry list of features that need to be added to the
> debugger.
>
> I could go through the Squeak debugger and duplicate all of the
> 'missing features', but my personal sense is that some of those
> features aren't useful - I know that I have not even read all of the
> menu items in the old Squeak debugger, let alone tried to figure out
> what they do...
>
> Getting a list of important/missing features from a small group is
> important to me (at least at the start). I don't have a personal
> sense of "what's missing" from the current OTDebugger, since I have
> not used the old Squeak debugger extensively. So getting feedback
> from "old hands" is important, but I also know that I won't be able
> to respond correctly to a general query for "what's missing from the
> debugger?"
>
> For direction towards the "120% debugger", I think it makes sense
> that you and rest of the Pharo leadership team make a list of
> "debugger franchise features" - i.e., a list of features that are a
> must have for the Pharo debugger and the other OB-Tools as well
> (BTW, if that list is to "duplicate all of the 'missing features'"
> then that's fine and I'm willing to do it).
>
> The debugger along with browsers are the face of the development
> environment and I don't want to bloat the debugger without at least
> a second opinion and I trust the opinions of you and the rest of the
> Pharo leadership team.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Dale
>
_______________________________________________
Pharo-project mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
