X-Authentication-Warning:	delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Date:	Wed, 30 Dec 2015 06:37:37 +0100 (CET)
X-X-Sender:	igor2 AT igor2priv
To:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-Debug:	to=geda-user AT delorie DOT com from="gedau AT igor2 DOT repo DOT hu"
From:	gedau AT igor2 DOT repo DOT hu
Subject:	Re: gEDA and it's future with Scheme & Guile was Re: [geda-user]
	Project leadership
In-Reply-To:	<A06FE370-5416-41F5-BBAA-BCF0D975DDD3@noqsi.com>
Message-ID:	<alpine.DEB.2.00.1512300635240.9035@igor2priv>
References:	<CAM2RGhS4L-ch6FEcLtdSt0vA0BdQZvq+AuFDP+9ea7Ftd=AALg AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <8444F816-17CE-4A56-A982-4A60DEDA72B8 AT noqsi DOT com> <alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 00 DOT 1512300544550 DOT 9035 AT igor2priv> <A06FE370-5416-41F5-BBAA-BCF0D975DDD3 AT noqsi DOT com>
User-Agent:	Alpine 2.00 (DEB 1167 2008-08-23)
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, 29 Dec 2015, John Doty wrote:

>
> On Dec 29, 2015, at 9:54 PM, gedau AT igor2 DOT repo DOT hu wrote:
>
>> After actually hacing gschem, I realized your idealistic view on how good the foundations are is just a dream.
>
> It?s not perfect but that isn?t a reason to make it worse. It?s pretty good compared to a lot of software.

There are resons to make it better.

There is no reason to claim geda has much better foundations than PCB.

There are reasons to check what parts PCB got better and what parts gschem 
got better and change both tools accordingly.

There is no reason to label any attempt to any change dangerous only 
because it's a change to existing tools, not proposed by you.

- Raw text -