Hi Łukasz, thank you for the feedback!

> "PyTrace" is already a name in use for a different purpose. I understand the
> itch to make the name more "right" but I am in general not a fan of renaming
> "PyDTrace" to anything else now. It was a placeholder from day one (SystemTap
> uses it, too, after all). So, looking closer at the patch now I'd prefer us
> to keep all existing names and add LTTng as another alternative engine here.
> That will make the patch much shorter.

What about `PyProbe`? Given the multitude of tools and techniques in this space, wouldn't it be worthwhile to clarify things before adding this? I think conflating `dtrace` and `lttng` would only lead to more confusion for users as they really are distinct technologies.

Apart from the `--with{out)-dtrace` configure options, are these terms exposed to users anywhere else? I agree that those options shouldn't be changed now.