X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 2015 03:53:15 +0200 (CEST)
X-X-Sender: igor2 AT igor2priv
To: "Nicklas Karlsson (nicklas DOT karlsson17 AT gmail DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com]" <geda-user AT delorie DOT com>
X-Debug: to=geda-user AT delorie DOT com from="gedau AT igor2 DOT repo DOT hu"
From: gedau AT igor2 DOT repo DOT hu
Subject: Re: [geda-user] back annotation proposal (RFC)
In-Reply-To: <20150831220701.929d36b81e49e264f37e61a5@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1509010351360.6924@igor2priv>
References: <alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 00 DOT 1508301838470 DOT 6924 AT igor2priv> <201508301802 DOT t7UI2twS031311 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com> <CAM2RGhRgPQG2WDFVb0SFvMbypyYKS2oYtD=851WHR6fOB4iWdA AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <201508310341 DOT t7V3fcfh022966 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com> <20150831111604 DOT 5b1bb421bc015de9a848e8a9 AT gmail DOT com>
 <55E42456 DOT 5080309 AT jump-ing DOT de> <20150831112032 DOT GA8963 AT visitor2 DOT iram DOT es> <20150831134127 DOT 9dccc4c2563ce7bba5ded79d AT gmail DOT com> <55E46E18 DOT 7060102 AT ecosensory DOT com> <alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 00 DOT 1508311725150 DOT 6924 AT igor2priv>
 <20150831220701 DOT 929d36b81e49e264f37e61a5 AT gmail DOT com>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (DEB 1167 2008-08-23)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
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 Mon, 31 Aug 2015, Nicklas Karlsson (nicklas DOT karlsson17 AT gmail DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com] wrote:

> PADS have a forward and backward option in this is an expensive software so it certainly work.

I don't know PADS but this logic is surely flawed. I see too many 
expensive software that works suboptimmaly or doesn't work at all.

> If changes are kept in different files and/or some scripts need to be 
> run I see as a variation on the same scheme.

Have you read my proposal?

Regards,

Igor2