X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Date: Sat, 27 Oct 2012 00:47:16 +0200
From: Bas Gieltjes <bas AT gieltjes DOT dds DOT nl>
To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: [geda-user] The state of gEDA/gaf (Was gEDA/PCBs diversity,
 Was: Pin hole size)
Message-ID: <20121027004716.6d970660@Parasomnia.thuis.lan>
In-Reply-To: <834283D4-0891-486E-A981-2FF20B32C615@noqsi.com>
References: <CANqhZFxYH+Y5U1ai7ey-s+4nz6eYDM2vx3aMDb7WuigNXmi4AQ AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<2CB304B5-9587-4734-84E4-49F464744D11 AT noqsi DOT com>
	<CANqhZFwPNG4R1dR2X0HB+tP1JzNXUAVg55gy54Lry5E49aAQ6Q AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<E9D200C7-475C-4CC7-A592-5A6C14B3EA25 AT noqsi DOT com>
	<6BF2E986-51EB-41E9-A4AD-8071CD00B1A1 AT jump-ing DOT de>
	<834283D4-0891-486E-A981-2FF20B32C615 AT noqsi DOT com>
X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.8.1 (GTK+ 2.24.10; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 26 Oct 2012 22:47:16.0626 (UTC) FILETIME=[D9227720:01CDB3CB]
X-RcptDomain: delorie.com
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by delorie.com id q9QMlL5U031620
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
Precedence: bulk



> >> I can see somebody writing a new schematic editor using 21st
> >> century GUI conventions, but it wouldn't be gschem, it would be a
> >> new development.
> > 
> > And how does that stop gschem moving to 21st GUI conventions, too?
> 
> Because the internals of gschem reflect very old notions of GUI. You
> can't get there from here in any practical way.
> 
> > Currently we have ridiculous situations like that pcb and gschem
> > can't even agree on the same mouse button for panning/zooming.
> 
> They are separate, independent tools with separate, independent
> histories, both predating modern GUI conventions. Why would you
> expect consistency here?
> 
> > Much less on other usage items. Arguments like "that's the most
> > powerful way" - which actually means "I'm used to this" - can't be
> > right for both.
> > 
> > What I simply do not get is why so many gEDA users literally insist
> > on gEDA's GUI being non-conformant to any other GUI tool out there.
> 
> Trying to tinker with gschem to make it look modern will result in a
> miserable kludge. But understand that gschem is actually a very
> shallow tool: it's simply a graphical editor for a rather simple file
> format. So, start with a modern GUI framework, the gEDA schematic
> file format, and fill in the glue. Leave gschem alone for those of us
> who are used to it.
> 
> > Or where else have you seen a tool which requires typing "e" and
> > "r" in that order to rotate an item?
> 
> Viewlogic. Two decades ago. gschem is very old-fashioned.

Nice explanation. But you forgot to mention the strength of your
favourite toolkit: system-gschemrc. 

Using the configure option (global-set-key "keybinding" 'hotkey) gives
the possibility to change keybindings to something that "21st GUI
conventions" users prefer.

Check the file gschemrc in this repository:
https://github.com/nixotic/gEDA-tools, "middle-button" and
"third-button" are configurable. Nice, I didn't know that this is
configurable. Is there geda-wiki information? No. Can these options be
used to move to a "21st GUI conventions"? Maybe.

Not being an expert with geda-pcb, but even those menu's are
configurable. Check or google "gpcb-menu.res". Not as easy as
system-gschemrc, you also need to supply the complete menu instead of
only the keybindings.  A pcb expert can shed more light.

I don't know what 21st GUI conventions for mouse and keyboard actions
are. It should be possible to apply them to gschem and pcb, without
breaking the current mouse and keyboard actions. Some patches are
probably needed to make gschem and pcb accept them.

Make the above the default for new users. Experienced user can stick
with the current defaults. You know how to wield the power of the
toolkit.

<snip>
> > Except their usage is confusing enough to make them a science on
> > their own. If there weren't helpers like xgsch2pcb or the recent
> > direct schematics import I couldn't encourage people to use gEDA.
> > Competitors like Fritzing are so much easier and more intuitive to
> > use.
> 
> That's the usual "I don't want a toolkit, but an integrated tool"
> complaint. But Fritzing can't do most of the things that gEDA can.

I am still wondering why the toolkit can't be used to resemble an
integrated tool without breaking or obstructing the underlying toolkit.
So that when integrated tool users gain more experience or want more
control they can use the underlying toolkit. But first give them easy
and consistent access to the tools.

Trying to halt development because it might obstruct your toolkit use
is not constructive. Try coaching users and (new) developers instead of
rejecting everything that eventually might obstruct your tool usage.


 Bas
--