X-Authentication-Warning:	delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-Original-DKIM-Signature:	v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
	d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
	h=date:from:to:subject:message-id:in-reply-to:references:organization
	:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
	bh=qTzVuUN50X9OR6ejlk/VboCyqTy65TAqNB/swLg06M0=;
	b=iVem+t/0JDXnpOWKPmIQdT2E9wYqWCcQy/eF4c2viFDuZprz1F9qdjUCFNvDUWhs81
	HQ95dNTmUaq06Q7oLDHGEkZkLbvW3zwNtXRIwSjK7tiZovMJrJ6GRLx3amoJcbkSFx5m
	xeVq84oYy5xWlpFgrPrJe27BgxAO8RczkV6ck2tGxZ8FrSn75X3kR5bNiFJUDO78+p6o
	rzn49VvTYstrPwNgo4yqvhGqTCHhAkqXcyiueqhQJUMyR+Gp4d8N1UJqOmdJBZMS2kvJ
	7SMhCNOStA85CTygQZC0bsTrr/oWsVRH6MroTJwNxXoS9lSv6cVZ7Y+TI5aOQNnwuJzp
	ajlA==
X-Received:	by 10.195.12.163 with SMTP id er3mr83385529wjd.135.1451676494844;
	Fri, 01 Jan 2016 11:28:14 -0800 (PST)
Date:	Fri, 1 Jan 2016 20:28:12 +0100
From:	"Levente Kovacs (leventelist AT gmail DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com]" <geda-user AT delorie DOT com>
To:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Subject:	Re: [geda-user] Re: Positive discussion topic thread
Message-ID:	<20160101202812.4d57f392@levivo>
In-Reply-To:	<CANDNR8qUCtttCn=euybPM0Zga+zv97Hxk5NO21HowX5p7pADAQ@mail.gmail.com>
References:	<CAJXU7q8BsPKicvAgFvaigLBmT9CS3dJ_eFYR84mwWEg-=Vyg8Q AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<CAJXU7q9RrJO8=rLG5rdnH_MHQRCO8oghxoGrsao7NfSMEPb+0A AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<20151230181538 DOT 32790b5b AT jive DOT levalinux DOT org>
	<201512310212 DOT tBV2C3MK029574 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com>
	<20151231024721 DOT GC19555 AT localhost DOT localdomain>
	<CANDNR8qUCtttCn=euybPM0Zga+zv97Hxk5NO21HowX5p7pADAQ AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
Organization:	logonex.eu
X-Mailer:	Claws Mail 3.11.1 (GTK+ 2.24.25; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
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 Thu, 31 Dec 2015 16:22:03 +0800
"Atommann (atommann AT gmail DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com]" <geda-user AT delorie DOT com> wrote:

> How about a shorter version 'gpcb'?
> This follows the naming convention, like gschem, gnetlist, etc.

If we name pcb to gpcb, it would suggest that pcb was an integral part of
geda. But I'm fine withe that.

So let us rename pcb to gpcb!

I propose let us start a new versioning scheme. I'd stick withe semantic
versioning.

http://semver.org/

Let us make a release of gpcb 1.0.0, and forget the past.

What about the logo? Shall we stick with the logo as it is today?

Levente

- Raw text -