X-Authentication-Warning:	delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
DKIM-Signature:	v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
	d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
	h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
	:content-type;
	bh=HWBUP3rJVDzuK88RHs2obOvvKIMLFD7RauuQiIsYeQs=;
	b=la8PyKALscbclMp4lByPj8s00vtE9My+t4SJw7oyHKAhSzZI3WXQbyRtnIZTzDUd94
	sLxy3QE5YZ7sebJbtL+R8Zao7HF8GaA6MA26V8+Nvwt9XzWYAUMFtF7QLnDcBBZMhmAi
	ffoViCGuJFiEcYBdDv1mHQAuFVLysuiBjJNcS1G2jeloZddMSC9sUSLXnjd84dB/lZeP
	VCzQr2088F9412APFr1NxnQ5aB/7LQDBLD/d6eNe7oun/UUyHsXMdnp7Hun3u/4RVUDo
	a69CWfU4hR66WfSomF5nzamOCL7vBBLH1FfHL/7R+R7Aw2nbbdlAhZMHHMKOPdmN1frg
	Ichw==
MIME-Version:	1.0
In-Reply-To:	<CAM2RGhQ7aZf_yiOw4ibKTe5RnH7p8W50Maqo1YrVnLbJuhX-1Q@mail.gmail.com>
References:	<50A688B8 DOT 4090809 AT neurotica DOT com>
	<CC923058-B962-45B5-973D-EA03906430B9 AT noqsi DOT com>
	<50A6A265 DOT 6050300 AT neurotica DOT com>
	<4E8E6F31-EF8D-4540-BA86-7935C1C3E6D8 AT noqsi DOT com>
	<50A6A95C DOT 5030903 AT neurotica DOT com>
	<355DEF4F-51BB-44A8-A5F4-D8564E7E7885 AT noqsi DOT com>
	<20121116213601 DOT 13718 DOT qmail AT stuge DOT se>
	<66889AAB-3A82-4861-ACB0-B35A876EF6F4 AT noqsi DOT com>
	<CAC4O8c8s3837dD5so1hu-QOm8PW69sehVNNX7njQvnRGzXODGw AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<B63F900B-2C12-48A4-AD4B-5A616078030B AT noqsi DOT com>
	<CAC4O8c9BAJe8_7KLL8aaGq30HCkj+q74DB9jywXRXogJzdqNzw AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<50A83AAA DOT 6060500 AT jump-ing DOT de>
	<B1A7C9C1-5EAE-49AB-A03A-D5D4AFD3B0C0 AT noqsi DOT com>
	<50A8615E DOT 2080800 AT neurotica DOT com>
	<05730E0F-4DA1-47C8-80BB-5D4F37EFD94E AT noqsi DOT com>
	<50A8675D DOT 30509 AT neurotica DOT com>
	<CAM2RGhQ7aZf_yiOw4ibKTe5RnH7p8W50Maqo1YrVnLbJuhX-1Q AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
Date:	Sun, 18 Nov 2012 00:42:15 -0500
Message-ID:	<CAM2RGhQogkUmHt7PL0vHOUcLCSZJOWWQGORWt2V8nZuutHiwPg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject:	Re: [geda-user] Thoughts on gschem UI
From:	Evan Foss <evanfoss AT gmail DOT com>
To:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
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

Sorry that really should have been the start of it's own thread.

On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 12:17 AM, Evan Foss <evanfoss AT gmail DOT com> wrote:
> I would like to butt in here with my opinion. I have a few minor minor
> gripes I have with gschem like the inability to do 45 degree rotation
> of symbols but I really don't care to see gschem change massively. It
> works very well even if it looks a bit dated.
>
> From my view point the rest of gEDA/PCB should change around gschem to
> better use it and not the other way around. There is a lot of unused
> metadata in a schematic that is yet unused and that is where most of
> my frustrations with gEDA come from. This is why see issues with the
> netlister. Following the Unix philosophy it does it's job providing a
> netlist but that removes a lot of the schematics metadata that other
> tools like PCB might want. For example which connections are a bus or
> meant to be routed differentially? There are comments I leave on
> schematics in gschem that I would like to be passed to PCB tools that
> get removed because we only deal with netlists. I have been
> contemplating for a while now writing something to be parallel in the
> work flow with gnetlist to just handle this stuff. I view this as
> working from gschem at the bottom up which is the opposite of the way
> modern top down development process goes but I am curious to see an
> opinion from the group.
>
> -Evan
>
> On Sat, Nov 17, 2012 at 11:43 PM, Dave McGuire <mcguire AT neurotica DOT com> wrote:
>> On 11/17/2012 11:35 PM, John Doty wrote:
>>>>> If you had a BASIC interpreter and you wanted to change to
>>>>> Python, you could fiddle with keywords and notation, maybe add a
>>>>> few extra statements, and create something that looked vaguely
>>>>> like Python. But it wouldn't really *be* Python. It's not
>>>>> practical to change a BASIC interpreter into a Python interpreter
>>>>> by patching it. Similarly, gschem isn't constructed the way you'd
>>>>> construct a 21st century graphics application.
>>>>
>>>> You KEEP saying that.  Why is it important that everything conform
>>>> to your idea of a "modern GUI"?
>>>
>>> It isn't important to *me* at all. I want stability. What I don't
>>> want is chaos in the name of turning gschem into something more
>>> modern. I'm trying to point out that this isn't trivial.
>>
>>   Understood.  And understandable.
>>
>>>> As I stated before, what constitutes a "modern GUI" will be
>>>> different a few years from now, at least from the perspective of
>>>> the unwashed masses.  At that time, will you demand that the suite
>>>> be rewritten again, for the reason that it has somehow become
>>>> useless because it's so "not a modern GUI application"?
>>>
>>> I'm the guy who is advocating caution here, remember? I'm asking that
>>> gschem not be damaged, that any drastic change be in the context of a
>>> new tool.
>>
>>   Ok.  So will you be writing this new tool?
>>
>>   If you plan to, I look forward to seeing it.  From the impression of
>> your work style that I get from your posts, I'm guessing I'd probably
>> like it.
>>
>>   If you're not planning on doing that, is it your desire that the
>> current developers undertake this project?  That's fine too, but I think
>> that, after treating them like this, they probably aren't too enthused
>> about the idea.
>>
>>   Just sayin'..
>>
>>   So...where do you want this to go?
>>
>>               -Dave
>>
>> --
>> Dave McGuire, AK4HZ
>> New Kensington, PA
>
>
>
> --
> Home
> http://evanfoss.googlepages.com/
> Work
> http://forge.abcd.harvard.edu/gf/project/epl_engineering/wiki/



-- 
Home
http://evanfoss.googlepages.com/
Work
http://forge.abcd.harvard.edu/gf/project/epl_engineering/wiki/

- Raw text -