X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Message-ID: <5592ABB1.7090404@plastitar.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2015 10:46:09 -0400
From: "P. Taylor" <phil AT plastitar DOT com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: [geda-user] gEDA/gschem still alive?
References: <1435510363 DOT 682 DOT 26 DOT camel AT ssalewski DOT de> <55902AB9 DOT 9000004 AT neurotica DOT com> <alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 00 DOT 1506281932040 DOT 6924 AT igor2priv> <20150629113018 DOT GH19654 AT fi DOT muni DOT cz> <1435581145 DOT 1447 DOT 19 DOT camel AT ssalewski DOT de> <CAOFvGD7npho6fPKAEmce6L1nXy=5EEsVaEH-Vj_XEuiLddodDA AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <20150630083528 DOT GY19654 AT fi DOT muni DOT cz> <1435666431 DOT 676 DOT 13 DOT camel AT ssalewski DOT de> <CAM2RGhQ75UcoEoz4zeEcyEShj+8C8ACJj4-iB7F1r+jyy+bUvw AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <5833A5F3-C17B-409D-A3B3-553F9DCFEAC5 AT noqsi DOT com>
In-Reply-To: <5833A5F3-C17B-409D-A3B3-553F9DCFEAC5@noqsi.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - omega.hrwebservices.net
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - delorie.com
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - plastitar.com
X-Get-Message-Sender-Via: omega.hrwebservices.net: authenticated_id: phil AT plastitar DOT com
X-Source: 
X-Source-Args: 
X-Source-Dir: 
Reply-To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com

On 6/30/2015 10:19 AM, John Doty wrote:
> On Jun 30, 2015, at 7:59 AM, Evan Foss (evanfoss AT gmail DOT com)<geda-user AT delorie DOT com>  wrote:
>
>> >John Doty : In the name of a more open workflow I was advocating PCB
>> >changing/adding TSV as an accepted input format for the other
>> >attributes I was suggesting. The idea being to break out of the
>> >workflow issues you see in PCB.
>> >
> Wouldn’t help in the least bit. The core issue with PCB is that it has no coherent model of what a PCB is: it’s just a grab bag of “features” with no foundation.

John,

I always enjoy hearing your outspoken comments on geda/PCB.  But isn't 
the indeterminate nature of PCB a good thing?  It's abstract _and_ it 
works for practical physical design.  And its easy to hack and hotwire 
for different situations.

The foundation is clearly there: it's the code and the file formats.  It 
works and that's why we like it.

There are highly determinate commercial offerings.  Yet PCB is the 
maximum software attainable by a small number of uncoordinated 
programmers, particularly when one considers that there are different 
desires and philosophies constantly at odds.

Phil Taylor