X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1085)
Subject: Re: [geda-user] The state of gEDA/gaf (Was gEDA/PCBs diversity, Was: Pin hole size)
From: John Doty <jpd AT noqsi DOT com>
In-Reply-To: <k6kqok$l6s$1@ger.gmane.org>
Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2012 04:42:52 -0600
Message-Id: <CF4CDFCF-EF69-4CE9-B211-52C4C166009E@noqsi.com>
References: <20121028164801 DOT GA4859 AT alpha2> <CANqhZFwPNG4R1dR2X0HB+tP1JzNXUAVg55gy54Lry5E49aAQ6Q AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <E9D200C7-475C-4CC7-A592-5A6C14B3EA25 AT noqsi DOT com> <6BF2E986-51EB-41E9-A4AD-8071CD00B1A1 AT jump-ing DOT de> <834283D4-0891-486E-A981-2FF20B32C615 AT noqsi DOT com> <C3C35AF4-24D1-4977-9134-2C0B13473D01 AT jump-ing DOT de> <54CAA7EE-7638-4B89-8197-111D0493F859 AT noqsi DOT com> <D59D8F6D-0436-4A8D-AFC0-5124BD3031D6 AT jump-ing DOT de> <508CE947 DOT 4050408 AT xs4all DOT nl> <508D302D DOT 1030105 AT jump-ing DOT de> <D04117DE-615E-412A-833E-4ED0F1B9A620 AT noqsi DOT com> <5FF7010F-BB82-41F2-8EBC-608E91E045F1 AT noqsi DOT com> <71Y DOT Jn6g DOT QcLTSHBZJi DOT 1GZPiP AT seznam DOT cz> <k6kqok$l6s$1 AT ger DOT gmane DOT org>
To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1085)
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by delorie.com id q9TAgwYc011644
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


On Oct 28, 2012, at 8:47 PM, Kai-Martin Knaak wrote:

> John D. will be quick to point out other work-flows and that he 
> actually uses some. These arguments tend to pop up time and again. I 
> did a poll on geda-user some time ago. It was probably 2010 or 2009. 
> You can look it up in the archive. (gmane archive, that is). 
> Results were not very surprising: Almost everybody does gschem->pcb. 
> Some also do some other work-flows. IIRC somebody even reported to 
> start with pcb without bothering with gschem in the first place.

1. Popularity doesn't measure power. TeX isn't popular, but it sure is powerful.

2. The survey was hardly scientific. In particular, you asked the question on a list that is only nominally devoted to gEDA: most of the discussion here is about pcb.

3. There was something wrong in your tabulation procedure. My response to your poll (http://archives.seul.org/geda/user/Jun-2008/msg00051.html) obviously didn't make it to your results, since none of the workflows I mentioned are there. 

4. There's no mention of any SPICE workflow in your results although that's clearly a fairly common use of gEDA. 

John Doty              Noqsi Aerospace, Ltd.
http://www.noqsi.com/
jpd AT noqsi DOT com