Re: Another test release of DDD to go along with remake 0.60 sometime soon

[R. Bernstein]

Andrew Gaylard asks:
 > Rocky,
 > 
 > If you're finished with the makedbg stuff (p-l-e-a-s-e pick a name
 > soon!), shouldn't we make an official release?  Just let me know,
 > and I'll do it.

Yes, for now I don't want to change the name yet again. If there is a
ground-swell reaction, later it can be addressed later.

 > Or do you want to finish with the python work first?

Yes, I would like spend a little time trying to get the interaction
with python working a little better. 

There are 3 things going on in this area.

1. There seems to be what I'd really call a python deficiency/neglect
   in that from to start the a stock python debugger one needs to run:
   python *name of path of python debugger script* *program* *prog-args*

   It's possible to address this by adding a symbolic link from say
   ${bindir}pdb to wherever. So installing ddd could do the additional
   service of installing ${bindir}pdb.

2. There are what looks to me simple deficiency/neglect not just of
   the ddd python code but of of the python debugger itself. And it is
   a pretty simple and straight-forward task to address this.

3. Were the above deficiency/neglect addressed possibly more and better
   use of the debugger would be available for ddd.

I hope ddd users don't mind, but I've basically been using ddd to also
help advance the state of debugging in a number of areas. In
particular bash, GNU make, and now possibly python. 

But, Andrew, whether you want to do this as one release or two, is
really your call.