X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-Sender: qpaz
From: "al davis (ad252 AT freeelectron DOT net) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com]" <geda-user AT delorie DOT com>
To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: [geda-user] Buttons for automation (obligatory grab at our shared 3rd rail) Re: [geda-user] Antifork
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2015 20:52:28 -0400
User-Agent: KMail/1.13.7 (Linux/3.2.0-4-amd64; KDE/4.8.4; x86_64; ; )
References: <CAM2RGhTJ-gywb3LrkKoNKUxkwJCTsJ7vRxiLtmrXa5Mnp0331w AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <DUB125-W46D6798DBF674B80F24208C6620 AT phx DOT gbl> <6B8DDCCF-0E84-43DC-94A3-89CE0E56F0ED AT noqsi DOT com>
In-Reply-To: <6B8DDCCF-0E84-43DC-94A3-89CE0E56F0ED@noqsi.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain;
  charset="windows-1252"
Message-Id: <201508242052.28189.ad252@freeelectron.net>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by delorie.com id t7P0qXfA003850
Reply-To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com

On Monday 24 August 2015, John Doty wrote:
> Yes. That’s constructive. Bare-bones simplicity out of the
> box, opt-in complexity. That’s the way a lot of excellent
> software (Python, LaTeX, …) works.

That's one of the reasons gnucap does everything in plugins.  
"Bare-bones simplicity out of the box, opt-in complexity".

It's important here that gnucap does EVERYTHING in plugins.  All 
device models, even the resistor, are plugins.  All commands 
except one are plugins.  Which one is the exception?  The 
command to load plugins.  But really even that one is designed 
as a plugin, and can be replaced by a plugin.  Even the input 
file format is a plugin.

On Monday 24 August 2015, Dave McGuire (mcguire AT neurotica DOT com) 
[via geda-user AT delorie DOT com] wrote:
>   You know, I hate (HATE!) all of the forking that happens in
> the FOSS world. 

That's another reason gnucap does everything in plugins.  It 
greatly reduces the need to fork.

Without plugins, forks are necessary, as the only way to share 
experimental code without turning the whole project into a big 
mess.

On Monday 24 August 2015, Dave McGuire (mcguire AT neurotica DOT com) 
[via geda-user AT delorie DOT com] wrote:
>   But, as opposed as I am to willy-nilly forking of FOSS
> projects, it sounds like you need a fork.  Gschem is not
> going to sit still just because you are opposed to any
> change.

Gschem and PCB both need to "fork" to rearchitect to use plugins 
like gnucap does.