X-Authentication-Warning:	delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Date:	Tue, 22 Dec 2015 22:29:16 -0500
From:	"al davis (ad252 AT freeelectron DOT net) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com]" <geda-user AT delorie DOT com>
To:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Subject:	Re: [geda-user] Proposing a New Hierarchical Data Structure?
Message-ID:	<20151222222916.1600543a@floyd.freeelectron.net>
In-Reply-To:	<CAJXU7q826wCc69qaQ71Y=Yqrnxg-044GD4ZSViCYSmf1SMiNNw@mail.gmail.com>
References:	<CAOFvGD6OiYxcGkOiQRVnvXW3TLs42bt7PE5Ot9s09hsukYicKA AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<20151221030451 DOT 02399163eb3e40f21c622c41 AT gmail DOT com>
	<CAOP4iL1PTdeCZdT+SthHwQtaxC4x06MbBQmxRcK3DZyQ-jfw=Q AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<20151221203331 DOT 20837 DOT qmail AT stuge DOT se>
	<CAJXU7q_XOJStJXhD547xW-+XROkBhctmMAWB-jm0cez5UvgZ7w AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<CAOP4iL1ri4UMeYr01Af-AH005DkLboKO72nGao+ByGmqA51W-A AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<20151222002012 DOT a88d7fe32a9336855eccd1d0 AT gmail DOT com>
	<CAJXU7q9dU=z5KZmgsh+Vau4zZNfEh4Awr5xdzL=6xhimLYVNLw AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 00 DOT 1512220421160 DOT 9035 AT igor2priv>
	<201512220412 DOT tBM4CJxb018546 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com>
	<alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 00 DOT 1512220528100 DOT 9035 AT igor2priv>
	<CAJXU7q89cBkSZZfaS5p2CSDeJRTGCzNs+bNBjL8_KYQ=o7gi=Q AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<20151222153828 DOT 28d3996c10f3182c5efc780a AT gmail DOT com>
	<CAJXU7q826wCc69qaQ71Y=Yqrnxg-044GD4ZSViCYSmf1SMiNNw AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
X-Mailer:	Claws Mail 3.11.1 (GTK+ 2.24.25; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
MIME-Version:	1.0
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 Tue, 22 Dec 2015 15:13:57 +0000
"Peter Clifton (petercjclifton AT googlemail DOT com) wrote:

> gEDA, nor any other open-source EDA package I know (at this point in
> the tool-chain), is the basis of any academic research.

gEDA, probably true.
Others, not true.

Spice, Gnucap, and several others came out of academic research.

Gnucap has been the basis of several projects in academic
research, and still is.

Open source and academic research have a long history of some kind of
relationship.

One thing that bewilders me is that most of the lesser schools
vigorously shun open source, while the leaders are more likely to
embrace it.  Even those that embrace it rarely contribute back to the
project that spawned their work.


> The kind of
> problems we are _still_ arguing about, and trying to solve have long
> ceased to be novel areas for research.

This IS true, and a major factor that drives them away.  It's also a
factor that divides us, so we get forks rather than collaboration.

But don't forget, not all academic "research" is at the Ph.D. level, or
at schools that are capable of it.  There is a big opportunity in the
middle.  We are missing it completely, and they are too.

And .. not all "academic" research is in an academic institution.  Not
all is in ANY institution.  Open source provides such opportunities to
anyone who steps up to them.  Admittedly, most of those are not
successful, but could be if they were nurtured.

- Raw text -