[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
|
RE: [cdt-dev] common gdb plugin
|
[correction]
between the CDI-GDB and DSF-GDB plugins. (I'm sure that was obvious, but
just the same).
At 08:31 AM 4/7/2010, John Cortell wrote:
I think this is an interesting
discussion, but it's tangential to what I suggested. My suggestion was
for a plugin to house gdb-specific things between the CDI-GDB ajnd
CDI-GDB plugin.
- gdb-isms do not belong in the base cdt debug plugin. I.e., those
plugins should house things common between CDI and DSF but not gdb
specific things
- the fact that the base cdt debug plugins currently house CDI is not
ideal but that has nothing to do with my suggestion
John
At 07:18 AM 4/7/2010, Marc Khouzam wrote:
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="_000_F7CE05678329534C957159168FA70DEC524447A763EUSAACMS0703e_"
Sorry for the confusion. There was no
official decision to stop fixing bugs for CDI. I should not have
talked
about bug fixes, but more of new features. If there will not be any
new features in CDI, then copying the
code might be a sufficient solution, to allow the copied DSF code to
evolve with new features.
But then bug fixes would have to be duplicated...
Tough call. I'm ok with either one, if
someone wants to take the time to move things around.
Marc
- From: cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [
mailto:cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Mikhail Khodjaiants
- Sent: Tuesday, April 06, 2010 9:52 PM
- To: CDT General developers list.
- Subject: Re: [cdt-dev] common gdb plugin
- On 06/04/2010 8:17 PM, Marc Khouzam wrote:
- In fact, if we are still in agreement
that CDI is no longer being evolved, duplicating the code would
- not be so bad since we would not change the CDI side of it anymore.
- I realize that in reality, fixes are still applied to CDI though, so
duplicate code is not a great thing.
- Do we believe this trend will slow down? That would be a way to
help make this decision.
- Marc, I probably missed the call when the agreement was announced.
Many companies are still shipping products based on CDI and it's a big
investment for them to switch to DSF/GDB. If we stop fixing bugs that's
not going to force them to switch to DSF. They will simply copy the
source code and will try to fix the problems themselves.
- I understand you having been in the similar situation before. You are
now the only person who works full time on DSF/GDB and if Ericsson decide
to stop supporting it then what?
- Doug, you can pretend that the CDI is not there, but it is there :)
_______________________________________________
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
