Re: frysk.proc.{ptrace,corefile} -> frysk.proc.{live,dead}

[Andrew Cagney <cagney at redhat dot com>]

Mark,


Mark Wielaard wrote:
> On Mon, 2007-06-18 at 14:02 -0400, Andrew Cagney wrote:
>   
> > Reading between the lines I suspect your concern here isn't so much 
> > about this specific change but about the rate of change in general?
> >     
>
> No, more the rate of changes I don't really understand the why of. I
> like to have more design discussion on the list so we all know why and
> what changes are proposed and being worked on.
>
>   

> > Remember Frysk as a project is relatively free flowing when it comes to 
> > its code and refactoring.  We don't spend days or weeks musing over 
> > choices, or trying to design perfection.  Instead we design for todays 
> > problem and let tomorrows developers re-design for their future.  This 
> > gives us much flexibility while while ensuring that we are focused on 
> > real rather than hypothetical needs.
> >     
>
> That is good. But what I am missing is the actual problem statement.
> What exactly isn't possible today and what is possible tomorrow after
> such a change is made. My concern is that some of this is just
> refactoring for refactorings sake. That is why I ask the why and what
> questions.
>
>   

Sorry I don't follow, the but.  This is good.

Andrew