X-Authentication-Warning:	delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-Original-DKIM-Signature:	v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
	d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
	h=date:from:to:subject:message-id:mail-followup-to:references
	:mime-version:content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to
	:user-agent;
	bh=Z9KhOQQhnKHqMGWxnGLZ2iM3/os/uyL+5PVN4MP3++g=;
	b=NhRsXyW7SsnDrar1gXseKV9M2w0IL0vTUPXcx4mV60ZaVaLAA/2fmM+oIoYiWQU5U1
	9LTBLF0XhqXpF4IK6Y90xC4fm0OlLkthz38u96DM0V+Yr7k3mr1kAkhYagl+Ypqi5KVc
	n+LgGBtYW61JZxcNMQAjV7h6BDYY7iLGu/q1OMrO66SJKWRqDahgH/W+P/+Lb4Se8c5N
	Vr08kKm2sr9pl/8ucybvSiFosk9oVwPTjVHmGBGEoH3WNGZGKfMKBsIkOm0mV53KbVXd
	O3eF5vSklNCcbnun6mjpQelaRuGMnjzDU+3j/+Sv6bMuZoUc+BtmojxS0PFYv+dRzTBM
	QM9w==
X-Received:	by 10.152.21.9 with SMTP id r9mr1237290lae.1.1442520767465;
	Thu, 17 Sep 2015 13:12:47 -0700 (PDT)
Date:	Thu, 17 Sep 2015 23:12:45 +0300
From:	"Vladimir Zhbanov (vzhbanov AT gmail DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com]" <geda-user AT delorie DOT com>
To:	geda-developers AT lists DOT launchpad DOT net, geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Subject:	Re: [Geda-developers] PLEASE STOP !!! - Re: [geda-user] Apollon
Message-ID:	<20150917201245.GE5896@localhost.localdomain>
Mail-Followup-To:	geda-developers AT lists DOT launchpad DOT net,
	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
References:	<CAM2RGhTbgUfGJZacRUQ=3VBAKtd0F7OV37oRZFVjHR4A9XecnA AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<20150917043146 DOT GA1837 AT localhost DOT localdomain>
	<alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 11 DOT 1509171124330 DOT 3828 AT nimbus>
	<CAM2RGhTAeBvYwZXxjXP3258ttd8zcTX6w5Xqjn7fiw6Lqve4vg AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<20150917191455 DOT GB5896 AT localhost DOT localdomain>
	<CAM2RGhT6SodPDmP8de18Z-HddmzTJpcjZe-vfrT4cW0NpwGZsg AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
MIME-Version:	1.0
In-Reply-To:	<CAM2RGhT6SodPDmP8de18Z-HddmzTJpcjZe-vfrT4cW0NpwGZsg@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent:	Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
Reply-To:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To:	nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

On Thu, Sep 17, 2015 at 03:39:05PM -0400, Evan Foss wrote:
...
> >> > It's frustrating for me that the core functionality of libgeda/gschem is
> >> > written in C (e.g. reading and writing of files) which makes it
> >> > unmaintainable (see, for example, what bugs are marked as critical at
> >> > https://bugs.launchpad.net/geda) for a long time. I believe, it would be
> >> > easier to fix them if the geda-gaf language was really Guile/Scheme.
> > What's wrong with this?
> 
> Everything Ed said in his reply I agree with and I think most people
> probably would too. For long term project health we have to
> deemphasize scheme use.
I believe it is very under-emphasized yet :(
...
> I am not opposing what you are doing, just saying that in the long run
> I worry that making the core use scheme when new developers for it are
> rare is dangerous.
Don't know.
...
> >> Yes Peter Brett also likes scheme but respectfully he is leaving.
> > All this is about consensus. I proposed a solution that already has been
> > considered and you can find the ideas in our wiki: using gobject's and
> > already made bindings (see wikipedia for links).
> 
> Again I was not opposing your project. Just pointing out you are a lot
> more bullish on scheme than it seems everyone else is.
...
> >> We need less emphasis on scheme. I am not saying it needs to go, just
> >> that we need to have an alternative.
> > I might say this about any other language.
> 
> I can't swing a cat in Cambridge Ma. with out hitting someone who
> knows C. Heck it was a required course when I was in college. Scheme
> is far lower in adoption. Again not saying you should not do your
> project.
Fair enough.

> >> >   1.) Libraries should be usable from any language.  Having several
> >> > different scripting languages in gEDA may be a bad idea (I'm not sure, but I
> >> > tend to agree with you), but there's really no reason why a Nim program
> >> > shouldn't be able to process gEDA files.
> > This one.
> > Two connected orthogonal arguments, unrelated to each other:
> > 1. having many scripting languages is a bad idea  (that is, Guile must go off)
> > 2. Nim must have an ability to process gEDA files (my first impression: why
> > guile? it restricts any other languages, e.g. Nim)
> 
> The line above that you are replying too. I don't recall writing that.
> I think it was someone elses.
It's Roland's one. Just an example of thoughts that cause protest in my
head (probably I am wrong?)
I had no intention to argue with you here, just my thoughts during
reading the letter.
...
> > I would agree with using his library if that had been done honestly,
> > after consensus among the developers. Now I don't ever know what the
> > geda-gaf admin status is for and what it changes if other people (hi, DJ
> > and Markus) decide who and where must drive the development in the
> > project (it's about so named "levels of trust" here) and have all levers
> > to move it the way they want without asking anybody else. Although I
> > appreciate their work, I feel this behaviour not be fair.
> 
> 1. The first time you miss attributed a quote to me I was ok but this
> is the second time and I am getting irritated. Again this was Roland.
> 2. You were the one decenter on the thread "developer excitement? was
> Re: [geda-user] gEDA/gschem still alive?" when the subject was raised.
> I assumed that was a consensus. Peter was totally absent at the time.

Sorry, I'm just tired. I've never written so much in English and never
thought I would do. It takes too much power to do this for me. I would
better programmed something :) Probably quoting is not the best one
because my mua converts HTML into text.

Cheers,
  Vladimir

- Raw text -