Hi!
As you know, I maintain a Neovim plugin for .NET development. The plugin currently downloads and bundles netcoredbg binaries so users get an OOTB debugging experience.
I’ve recently opened several PRs to netcoredbg for improvements such as primary constructor inspection, column breakpoints, and related debugger features. I noticed you’ve pulled some of those commits into this repo as well, which is great to see.
I’m really glad to see active development happening here. As a downstream maintainer, I’ve found the upstream netcoredbg feedback and release cycle a bit slow, which makes it harder to ship debugger improvements to users. Seeing this fork move more actively is encouraging, and I’d love to contribute more if that would be helpful.
Because upstream releases can take a while, I wanted to ask whether you’d be comfortable with me also supporting or bundling dncdbg in my plugin. This would give me a much faster feedback loop and let users try these debugger improvements sooner. In return, it could also bring more users, bug reports, feature requests, and potential contributors to your fork.
I’d also love to contribute more directly here if that would be helpful. If issues come up that are related to areas I’ve worked on, or areas where you think I could help, feel free to tag me. I’d be happy to help with debugging, testing, reviewing issues, opening PRs, or generally being more involved in development so the burden does not fall entirely on you.
If you’re open to this, I’d like to align on how it should work:
- Should future PRs from me target this repo, upstream
netcoredbg, or both?
- Where would you prefer users to report issues: this repo, upstream
netcoredbg, or my plugin repo if the source is unclear?
- Would you be okay with me documenting
dncdbg as an experimental and faster-moving debugger?
- Would you be comfortable tagging me in relevant issues or discussions where I might be able to contribute?
No pressure either way. I wanted to ask before exposing more users to the fork, and to make sure that if I do, it is useful for the project rather than creating extra maintenance work for you.
Hi!
As you know, I maintain a Neovim plugin for .NET development. The plugin currently downloads and bundles
netcoredbgbinaries so users get an OOTB debugging experience.I’ve recently opened several PRs to netcoredbg for improvements such as primary constructor inspection, column breakpoints, and related debugger features. I noticed you’ve pulled some of those commits into this repo as well, which is great to see.
I’m really glad to see active development happening here. As a downstream maintainer, I’ve found the upstream netcoredbg feedback and release cycle a bit slow, which makes it harder to ship debugger improvements to users. Seeing this fork move more actively is encouraging, and I’d love to contribute more if that would be helpful.
Because upstream releases can take a while, I wanted to ask whether you’d be comfortable with me also supporting or bundling dncdbg in my plugin. This would give me a much faster feedback loop and let users try these debugger improvements sooner. In return, it could also bring more users, bug reports, feature requests, and potential contributors to your fork.
I’d also love to contribute more directly here if that would be helpful. If issues come up that are related to areas I’ve worked on, or areas where you think I could help, feel free to tag me. I’d be happy to help with debugging, testing, reviewing issues, opening PRs, or generally being more involved in development so the burden does not fall entirely on you.
If you’re open to this, I’d like to align on how it should work:
netcoredbg, or both?netcoredbg, or my plugin repo if the source is unclear?dncdbgas an experimental and faster-moving debugger?No pressure either way. I wanted to ask before exposing more users to the fork, and to make sure that if I do, it is useful for the project rather than creating extra maintenance work for you.