+1. You guys have been doing great work on the parity issue. We need to do a check point and decide where to go next.
I'll also update my progress on build. My thinking has been changing over the last couple of weeks as I start to think of autotools, CMake, qmake and such as external managed build systems. I'm thinking that a better approach would be to make it easier to integrate those systems and reuse the external builder, scanner discovery, etc., as opposed to make our managed build system interact with them.
As a part of that, I'm wondering, by providing generic and extensible UI for the New Project Wizard, are we making things horribly complex? For example, should we be adding new project wizards specific to the types of projects users are creating, e.g., the new Qt project wizard, going back to the new Managed and Standard project wizards? What is the desired workflow? I have one eye on ensuring these things are reusable by products and fit nicely into their new project wizard strategy.
Doug.
Hi,
I'd like to discuss making DSF-GDB the default debugger
integration for CDT.
It is essential to have more
people use DSF-GDB if we want to get solid momentum
towards feature development and
patch contributions.
The
feature-parity effort is progressing very well so we need to discuss the
next
logical
step.
Thanks
Marc
Reminder of the call tomorrow. If you have any agenda items, please
let the people on cdt-dev know.
Thanks,
_______________________________________________
cdt-dev mailing list
cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev
_______________________________________________
cdt-dev mailing list
cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev