Bring 'node-inspect' (CLI Debugger) under the Foundation #190

Open
joshgav opened this Issue Jan 3, 2017 · 7 comments

Projects

None yet

6 participants

@joshgav
Member
joshgav commented Jan 3, 2017

As summarized in nodejs/diagnostics#67, work is underway to replace Node's current built-in CLI debugger (node debug) with a new one compatible with the new Inspector Protocol. @jkrems has an implementation at https://github.com/buggerjs/node-inspect and work has begun in nodejs/node#10187 to include this as a third-party dependency under "deps" in nodejs/node.

We'll likely also further integrate it into the standard Node binary so that node debug or node inspect work out-of-the-box as in the past, see nodejs/node#10187 for discussion.

Since the CLI debugger is a significant component of Node core, and because we'd like to facilitate broader and deeper work on this basic diagnostic tool, the @nodejs/diagnostics WG recommends that the TSC:

  1. Bring node-inspect under the governance of the Node Foundation.
  2. Bring the node-inspect repo into the nodejs GitHub org.

I believe all necessary prerequisites as described in TSC/Project-Lifecycle.md have been completed.

Thanks!

@jkrems jkrems referenced this issue in nodejs/diagnostics Jan 3, 2017
Open

Bringing node-inspect into the fold #67

4 of 9 tasks complete
@mhdawson
mhdawson commented Jan 5, 2017

I'm +1 on moving forward on this.

@jasnell jasnell added the tsc-agenda label Jan 12, 2017
@joshgav
Member
joshgav commented Jan 13, 2017

The TSC concluded in yesterday's meeting to bring in node-inspect as proposed, pending agreement from the CTC. I think the next step would be to ask @nodejs/ctc to chime in here or in nodejs/CTC#40 to finalize.

@jasnell or @mhdawson can you please label with ctc-agenda or ctc-review to get people's attention? Thanks!

@jasnell jasnell added ctc-agenda and removed tsc-agenda labels Jan 13, 2017
@MylesBorins
Member
MylesBorins commented Jan 13, 2017 edited

Should we open a new issue for voting or just vote in the already open issue?

edit: i'm +1

@joshgav
Member
joshgav commented Jan 13, 2017

@MylesBorins seems +1's here or in the CTC issue should be sufficient, there are a lot of issues open already :)

If we have enough votes in favor in the issues I'll collect them before the next TSC meeting and we can move forward, if not we can bring it up again in the Jan-25 CTC meeting to finalize.

Thanks!

@Trott
Member
Trott commented Jan 14, 2017 edited

+1 from me!

@Trott
Member
Trott commented Jan 18, 2017 edited

At today's CTC meeting, this received additional "yes" votes from @Fishrock123 @addaleax @mscdex @rvagg @bnoordhuis @thefourtheye @jasnell @ChALkeR and @trevnorris. As this already has 3 yes votes from CTC members above (me, @mhdawson, and @MylesBorins), that's 12 yes votes, which is a majority of the CTC. This passes.

I'll remove the ctc-agenda label. Hopefully someone knowledgable can indicate what the next step is now that this has passed. (CC @williamkapke I guess.)

@Trott Trott removed the ctc-agenda label Jan 18, 2017
@williamkapke
Member

It looks like all of the documents are in place -- awesome work @nodejs/diagnostics !

It just needs to be transferred and @rvagg needs to add it to the TSC's scope doc PR: #144

@joshgav joshgav referenced this issue in nodejs/diagnostics Jan 19, 2017
Open

Diag WG Meeting - 2017-01-19 #79

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment