delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi   search  
Mail Archives: geda-user/2012/11/18/05:48:13

X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2012 11:53:34 +0100 (CET)
X-X-Sender: igor2 AT igor2priv
To: 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] new snapshots?
In-Reply-To: <50A8AFD3.6090800@unige.ch>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1211181138090.25985@igor2priv>
References: <50A688B8 DOT 4090809 AT neurotica DOT com> <CANqhZFyLCmDkS200wqYWQEK-0D40bY4tmHkY8LpFX0suva-hiw AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <50A8AFD3 DOT 6090800 AT unige DOT ch>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (DEB 1167 2008-08-23)
MIME-Version: 1.0
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 Sun, 18 Nov 2012, Juergen Harms wrote:

> On 11/16/2012 08:39 PM, Gareth Edwards wrote:
>> On 16 November 2012 18:40, Dave McGuire <mcguire AT neurotica DOT com> wrote:
>>>    Are there any plans for a new snapshot or "unstable" release of either
>>> anytime soon?
>>> 
>> 
>> We're actively working towards gaf stable-1.8 again. I'm not presuming
>> a timescale but I don't think it will be long.
>> 
>
> Excellent news - and probably in time for making it into the new release of 
> Mageia (Mageia 3)
>
>> To me, gschem is a power tool with few problems, while pcb is unusable
>>
>
> I agree with the first part - isn't the second part a minority opinion (looks 
> like a quite small minority)?
>

Among pcb users it is, for sure. Of course we don't know how many users 
turn pcb down and never express their opinion.


I am a pcb user for many years. I see the limitation 
of the infrastructure about special handling copper and non-copper layers, 
holes, footprints, and I do realize that there is a collection of special 
cases that make pcb work. I also see how some seemingly innocent features 
are hard to implement with the current infrastructure, partly due to that 
design.

However... I don't think this is the reason, or even on the list of 
possible reasons new users may turn down pcb. I've used gschem+pcb on 
small group university courses for multiple semesters and many students 
didn't really like the tools, but none ever named such design decisions or 
infrastructural limitation as reason.

Pcb is not unusable - even if it depends on many special cases, 
it very often covers the need. It works very fine for me, and I choose it 
over other packages because it is closest to UNIX philosophy with 
totally separate schematics, pcb layout and other tools that I can drive 
easily from makefiles and store all the design files in svn and process 
them with scripts (power of text formats).


There are some parts I would leave out, which are trying to fulfill very 
different requirements (i.e. dbus, 3d rendering, spread-sheet-like editing 
of things, import schematics in pcb). As long as one can disable them 
or avoid using them, I see no major problem. And even when it is not, one 
can keep using an old version or maintain a fork.


Regards,

Tibor


- Raw text -


  webmaster     delorie software   privacy  
  Copyright © 2019   by DJ Delorie     Updated Jul 2019