Mail Archives: geda-user/2015/09/12/19:27:40
On Sep 12, 2015, at 4:41 PM, Britton Kerin (britton DOT kerin AT gmail DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com] <geda-user AT delorie DOT com> wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 12, 2015 at 2:15 PM, John Doty <jpd AT noqsi DOT com> wrote:
>>
>> On Sep 12, 2015, at 3:44 PM, Britton Kerin (britton DOT kerin AT gmail DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com] <geda-user AT delorie DOT com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Sat, Sep 12, 2015 at 12:08 PM, John Doty <jpd AT noqsi DOT com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Sep 12, 2015, at 12:55 PM, John Griessen <john AT ecosensory DOT com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 09/12/2015 11:53 AM, John Doty wrote:
>>>>>> On Sep 12, 2015, at 10:25 AM, John Griessen<john AT ecosensory DOT com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 09/12/2015 10:51 AM, John Doty wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Test cases are important, but I don’t think it’s necessary to have add-on modules maintained with the core sources in order to test them together.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Why? Roland made a clear case for that.
>>>>>> Successful projects like Python keep core and add-ons separate.
>>>>>
>>>>> We don't have enough people to act like the python project.
>>>>
>>>> There are 51 megabytes of contributions from 83 contributors on gedasymbols.org. We’re *already* acting like the Python project, except we’re pretending we aren’t.
>>>
>>> And gedasymbols is not well used, or well-tested, or particularly
>>> accessible to the uninitiated.
>>
>> We could certainly do better.
>>
>>> It great to separate things into
>>> modules but there's no point in not storing and distributing them
>>> together with the core distribution.
>>
>> I think many would find a 50 MB distribution a bit much.
>
> By modern standards, this is minute.
Oh, anybody can *store* it. But comprehend it?
>
>> Simply distributing a mixed bag of stuff with the core will not relieve confusion.
>
> Modules aren't just a mixed bag of stuff, they're pieces designed to work with
> the core. It's helpful if people know they exist and can try them easily.
>
> Gedasymbols is arguably a lot more mixed since the symbols are created in
> different ways, but if they had some sort of common interface for
> build/search etc.
> I think it would be worth adding them also, since the lack of them is
> another big
> weakness of gEDA.
>
>> I also see the success of the core/addon approach in other >projects.
>
> They are much bigger projects, with established ways of finding the modules.
> gEDA doesn't have any such way.
We need a way.
> It's easier to just distribute them with
> the core than make one and expect it to be adopted.
I don’t think that’s an answer. Successful projects I’m aware of don’t do it that way.
John Doty Noqsi Aerospace, Ltd.
http://www.noqsi.com/
jpd AT noqsi DOT com
- Raw text -