delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi | search |
X-Authentication-Warning: | delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f |
X-Recipient: | geda-user AT delorie DOT com |
Message-ID: | <5592ABB1.7090404@plastitar.com> |
Date: | Tue, 30 Jun 2015 10:46:09 -0400 |
From: | "P. Taylor" <phil AT plastitar DOT com> |
User-Agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0 |
MIME-Version: | 1.0 |
To: | geda-user AT delorie DOT com |
Subject: | Re: [geda-user] gEDA/gschem still alive? |
References: | <1435510363 DOT 682 DOT 26 DOT camel AT ssalewski DOT de> <55902AB9 DOT 9000004 AT neurotica DOT com> <alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 00 DOT 1506281932040 DOT 6924 AT igor2priv> <20150629113018 DOT GH19654 AT fi DOT muni DOT cz> <1435581145 DOT 1447 DOT 19 DOT camel AT ssalewski DOT de> <CAOFvGD7npho6fPKAEmce6L1nXy=5EEsVaEH-Vj_XEuiLddodDA AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <20150630083528 DOT GY19654 AT fi DOT muni DOT cz> <1435666431 DOT 676 DOT 13 DOT camel AT ssalewski DOT de> <CAM2RGhQ75UcoEoz4zeEcyEShj+8C8ACJj4-iB7F1r+jyy+bUvw AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <5833A5F3-C17B-409D-A3B3-553F9DCFEAC5 AT noqsi DOT com> |
In-Reply-To: | <5833A5F3-C17B-409D-A3B3-553F9DCFEAC5@noqsi.com> |
X-AntiAbuse: | This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report |
X-AntiAbuse: | Primary Hostname - omega.hrwebservices.net |
X-AntiAbuse: | Original Domain - delorie.com |
X-AntiAbuse: | Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] |
X-AntiAbuse: | Sender Address Domain - plastitar.com |
X-Get-Message-Sender-Via: | omega.hrwebservices.net: authenticated_id: phil AT plastitar DOT com |
X-Source: | |
X-Source-Args: | |
X-Source-Dir: | |
Reply-To: | geda-user AT delorie DOT com |
On 6/30/2015 10:19 AM, John Doty wrote: > On Jun 30, 2015, at 7:59 AM, Evan Foss (evanfoss AT gmail DOT com)<geda-user AT delorie DOT com> wrote: > >> >John Doty : In the name of a more open workflow I was advocating PCB >> >changing/adding TSV as an accepted input format for the other >> >attributes I was suggesting. The idea being to break out of the >> >workflow issues you see in PCB. >> > > Wouldn’t help in the least bit. The core issue with PCB is that it has no coherent model of what a PCB is: it’s just a grab bag of “features” with no foundation. John, I always enjoy hearing your outspoken comments on geda/PCB. But isn't the indeterminate nature of PCB a good thing? It's abstract _and_ it works for practical physical design. And its easy to hack and hotwire for different situations. The foundation is clearly there: it's the code and the file formats. It works and that's why we like it. There are highly determinate commercial offerings. Yet PCB is the maximum software attainable by a small number of uncoordinated programmers, particularly when one considers that there are different desires and philosophies constantly at odds. Phil Taylor
webmaster | delorie software privacy |
Copyright © 2019 by DJ Delorie | Updated Jul 2019 |