Over the years, I found that the emphasis on building applications was misplaced, and that what PM is really needed for is to help manage and work with J source code. This latter is a non-trivial issue for active developers, and while other tools or IDEs could be used, I think it better to have custom-built facilities for interactive use, and hook up to svn/git/meld and other tools as needed.
Some form of PM will be retained, though standalone builds and some other facilities will be reduced or eliminated. I hope the new PM will be simple and easy enough for everyone to use. Brian Schott wrote: > I have not used ProjMgr. It seems to confusing too me and I have not > produced any projects meant to be standalone, so there has been little > enticement. > > My routine for developing code is to use vim and J together, with the > most annoying part being backing up my revisions. > > I still have not found a practical means of getting a source code > cross-reference. I have toyed with jtags in vim, but find it > unsatisfying because the output file is not brief and the live vim > support does not give an overview like a printed output would. > > Access to a separate test file during development as Raul has > mentioned is a very nice feature. And the overall layout and > functionality of the system to which Oleg referred, seems great. > > Integrating cobroswer, trace, and debug into ProjMgr would be a big > > So I think I would like these issues discussed. And I wonder if > breaking the ProjMgr into two pieces, one that focuses on developing > standalone apps for distribution, and one that emphasizes local > development and testing, would simplify its use. > > But looking back at all I have suggested makes me realize how > complicated ProjMgr has to be and I am not sure I would ever learn to > configure it and use it. > > Thank you for asking, Chris. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
