[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Thanks (was Re: some thoughts)

From: Marko Schütz
Subject: Thanks (was Re: some thoughts)
Date: Fri, 10 Oct 2008 12:05:13 -0400
User-agent: Wanderlust/2.14.0 (Africa) SEMI/1.14.6 (Maruoka) FLIM/1.14.7 (Sanjō) APEL/10.7 Emacs/22.1 (i386--netbsdelf) MULE/5.0 (SAKAKI)

Dear Jose,

At Thu, 09 Oct 2008 21:56:47 +0200,
Jose María Gómez wrote:
> Well, although you have read that things in the web, real plans are not
> like that. We have discussed that things in the distribution list but
> web page is not up to day.
> Peter Wainwright has done a really good you decoupling logic from gui
> and it is easier to do the core in one place and a qt, gtkmm ot whatever
> you want interface to use it. Peter is working in a gtkmm interface and
> at this time there is a branch in svn for that.
> At this time I am the official maintainer but I sent an email to the
> list seeking a new one. Today I have receive an email from Peter
> offering to be the one to take care of this. I think it is a really good
> news because he has been working in code a lot.
> Thanks for your thoughts and I hope DDD to be better shortly.

I hope my email has not come across as implying that DDD isn't the
great debugger that it is: about a year and a half ago I looked at the
different options and for me DDD was and still is the best option I
know of.

Thank's to all the contributors for providing such an excellent tool.


> On Wed, 2008-10-08 at 14:28 -0400, Marko Schütz wrote
> > Dear All,
> > 
> > I just subscribed to the list, but have been a user of DDD for quite
> > some time.
> > 
> > The reason I subscribed is that I found some postings on the web that
> > I wanted to comment on.
> > 
> > "rewrite DDD in C++"
> > IMHO that will tie up quite some effort. But will it bring substantial
> > improvement? I doubt that very much. I have not looked at the source
> > code of DDD yet, but I assume/hope that it's fairly clean. DDD has not
> > seen substantial development in quite some time and I seriously doubt
> > that rewriting it in C++ would be a good way to invest the little
> > volunteer effort that goes into it right now. I also doubt that this
> > is a direction that would attract many new volunteers.
> > 
> > "change to Qt, GTKmm" While I agree that the GUI feels antiquated,
> > again I do not think the effort required by a project like this would
> > be well invested. Pretty much for the same reasons as above. I
> > consider forking DDD into two projects, one using Qt the other using
> > GTKmm a very bad decision as this will further divert any
> > contributions to the project.
> > 
> > "complete control by keystrokes"
> > That I actually think would be a good way forward.
> > 
> > "debugging"
> > This would be my number one priority. Fix all currently outstanding
> > bugs, collect user feedback on bugs not yet reported, fix those
> > too. In general make DDD more solid.
> > 
> > Best regards,
> > 
> > Marko
> > _______________________________________________ ddd mailing list 
> > address@hidden http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/ddd
> _______________________________________________
> ddd mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/ddd

Attachment: pgpGp2f4_1dqi.pgp
Description: PGP signature

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]