X-Authentication-Warning:	delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-Google-DKIM-Signature:	v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
	d=google.com; s=20120113;
	h=mime-version:x-originating-ip:in-reply-to:references:date
	:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding
	:x-gm-message-state;
	bh=RGBPHTBq6OhbbLSXJM4ifJxRJvX4YzJEJjgpw5Q3GQw=;
	b=MbePrwBk0fJssGxVIzp/KhumNBUdPZVc8fBbugsNhKIntuz/Jr24xCD6/JLtaUr5W3
	xLSx3/cmfQxOlvXc+qqgZ/dYa+hPUtkI+FS4nCOYdx4JlP4nIDWtp0y0yMZILTn7ii+L
	OOVL/VXtDE3+0oe9ddCkGEc3A9wdKzhXujyq0ELq8wXzHvYSZg1el2pkS6Vt5mqtKFZ1
	lNoAxw+dkQ/NT9ek6IfhwAbby7/9mCuUdCHs8eRHZiB+eeJYB8tsdGx89+lmJSykrCWH
	aM0m6OBLfMDt59FBSmANoruS2DKpmqYS9huhhAlPi0P4yir7goVu8Ui/siUxQkzGhJcM
	bcrw==
MIME-Version:	1.0
X-Originating-IP:	[92.235.51.46]
In-Reply-To:	<2CB304B5-9587-4734-84E4-49F464744D11@noqsi.com>
References:	<CANqhZFxYH+Y5U1ai7ey-s+4nz6eYDM2vx3aMDb7WuigNXmi4AQ AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<2CB304B5-9587-4734-84E4-49F464744D11 AT noqsi DOT com>
Date:	Fri, 26 Oct 2012 08:00:27 +0100
Message-ID:	<CANqhZFwPNG4R1dR2X0HB+tP1JzNXUAVg55gy54Lry5E49aAQ6Q@mail.gmail.com>
Subject:	Re: [geda-user] The state of gEDA/gaf (Was gEDA/PCBs diversity, Was:
	Pin hole size)
From:	Gareth Edwards <gareth AT edwardsfamily DOT org DOT uk>
To:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-Gm-Message-State:	ALoCoQlB+cFgAbAGkb+xb0y4/koKqLXGXPF7Sya7LKOHNY8j5AYIR2Xye3Mw4+R2Do8gzUrJQS1P
X-MIME-Autoconverted:	from quoted-printable to 8bit by delorie.com id q9Q70VjL022013
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

On 26 October 2012 01:49, John Doty <jpd AT noqsi DOT com> wrote:
> On Oct 25, 2012, at 4:21 AM, Gareth Edwards wrote:
>>
>> I think that's true for gEDA/PCB, but  gEDA/gaf appears to be close to
>> abandonware right now.
>
> Stability is a good thing in production software.

I don't disagree but gaf is not TeX (yet?). I'd love it to be at that
point in its lifecycle.

>> 4 out of the 6 commits since February have been for the new print
>> tool, not in the core of the code.
>
> That's the nature of a toolkit. It preferable to make improvements by adding new tools, rather than breaking old tools with unanticipated consequences of new features.
>
> To a large extent, the gEDA action has moved to gedasymbols.org, which has grown to 32 MB of stuff (symbols, footprints, scripts, simulation models, ...). That's a tremendous community contribution, and I think that's where the biggest opportunities to contribute are.

Sure, there's great work going on over there. But you yourself feel
that gaf is not enough for you that you've forked it to lambda-geda,
so you clearly think there is work to be done. So do I.

On 26 October 2012 03:13, Dave McGuire <mcguire AT neurotica DOT com> wrote:
>   THIS!
>
>   I am getting SO sick and tired of this broken-ass software world
> thinking that a package is "dead" just because it isn't crapping out 48
> new releases per year.

("broken-ass software world thinking"? thanks)

You both miss half my point. What I was trying to point out is that
gaf has many known bugs with fixes ready to go that can't be applied
to HEAD. Furthermore, since our last stable release, there have been
561 commits to  HEAD; these changes won't be appearing in downstream
distributions until we release again. That's before we've even thought
about future enhancements and features.

In my opinion, both of these are due to lack of active developers with
commit access, not because the software is stable - again, in my
opinion, it isn't. It's just pretending to be.

Cheers
Gareth

- Raw text -