X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f X-Recipient: geda-user AT delorie DOT com X-TCPREMOTEIP: 207.224.51.38 X-Authenticated-UID: jpd AT noqsi DOT com Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_BE525E9D-A8C9-414C-835C-C264DE4F6B70"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha512 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\)) Subject: Re: gEDA and it's future with Scheme & Guile was Re: [geda-user] Project leadership X-Pgp-Agent: GPGMail 2.5.2 From: John Doty In-Reply-To: Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2015 23:00:24 -0700 Message-Id: <2297464D-0109-4CA8-98D5-AC33BD0B02C5@noqsi.com> References: <8444F816-17CE-4A56-A982-4A60DEDA72B8 AT noqsi DOT com> To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6) 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 --Apple-Mail=_BE525E9D-A8C9-414C-835C-C264DE4F6B70 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 On Dec 29, 2015, at 10:37 PM, gedau AT igor2 DOT repo DOT hu wrote: >=20 >=20 > On Tue, 29 Dec 2015, John Doty wrote: >=20 >>=20 >> On Dec 29, 2015, at 9:54 PM, gedau AT igor2 DOT repo DOT hu wrote: >>=20 >>> After actually hacing gschem, I realized your idealistic view on how = good the foundations are is just a dream. >>=20 >> It?s not perfect but that isn?t a reason to make it worse. It?s = pretty good compared to a lot of software. >=20 > There are resons to make it better. >=20 > There is no reason to claim geda has much better foundations than PCB. I=92ve never found a serious limitation in geda-gaf abstractions. It can = do pretty much everything I need. Not always in the way I want, but = flexibility is a virtue in both software and humans. Pcb simply can=92t = capture perfectly reasonable structures. That=92s both limiting and = confusing. >=20 > There are reasons to check what parts PCB got better and what parts = gschem got better and change both tools accordingly. >=20 > 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. And if you pay attention, I don=92t. But if you feel the need to sell a = change to me, it helps if you base it on what=92s already there and = working, using the interfaces already provided. John Doty Noqsi Aerospace, Ltd. http://www.noqsi.com/ jpd AT noqsi DOT com --Apple-Mail=_BE525E9D-A8C9-414C-835C-C264DE4F6B70 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Comment: GPGTools - https://gpgtools.org iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJWg3L4AAoJEF1Aj/0UKykRV54QAKIga7P/4kfdfYfZ7EAxr0qP eQUj6mw+u55LKOOtthJmZPtNXRb5+ZHxhGSSmJJV0pcPZ+Viw1aoJPqz06WjLtc7 HOOTTm8HjzfMbyDFzWbDhhpuYdZ4NDsyf94YASx/v3rOX8iycIgyg1gDzPThmREA fYF5k3fiwCJvo2eNWpaFMQYrkdED30/oU8qojEguHXi+mnZ786Z2KAi48DqIywyY Mn22JcZ6tN8nd30m+7C0WxlQ8neMRQxZdLWy6Gr5rf/3XaIWaffw/s2gAa9ffFBq fXRodN2m0PQgO0t66+zmKPqgS1hyIeaaSJH+7yAS52zmV7Bs3jx0szhmUjNzD8Jm XfwBOQ3XGwExTw1z2PC+eeZiAWHWMlpbXzRI+gdUV2Xsk2ueeZhexxGBvM34oY3Z iQ9jFydofitxbDH56n3uwatFF+EH+u0V7mAiR/FCZ2XNLlig4GPPb0/Hz6nMGKVY zXnNEvtae7LsFlrXetuozwd6DXQ4bsg+54pKHoZTxtMIrehwKj7ZfXXOZnV1DJBm A6BC8PSMyXGYV4+XaPinO7BqsN9wTL75S6OV9okuXIH0ZIukPADDBrkP3oCkrGkb lh9qI7CvVWxcsdvTLKqAFX7AmjXzlWe36gile49Mgq5aSA2i+y9RRFG3tXl97Tdd XXP4uopWbsgsZgKwUoxY =EDdv -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Apple-Mail=_BE525E9D-A8C9-414C-835C-C264DE4F6B70--