X-Authentication-Warning:	delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-UW-Orig-Sender:	fpm AT homer01 DOT u DOT washington DOT edu
Date:	Thu, 7 Jan 2016 08:43:28 -0800 (PST)
From:	"Frank Miles (fpm AT u DOT washington DOT edu) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com]" <geda-user AT delorie DOT com>
To:	"Britton Kerin (britton DOT kerin AT gmail DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com]" <geda-user AT delorie DOT com>
Subject:	Re: gEDA and it's future with Scheme & Guile was Re: [geda-user]
	Project leadership
In-Reply-To:	<CAC4O8c9k+f49LfgUr6nGLfMG2ewk0c-EwTEmkNA2dGSYL51RPg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID:	<alpine.LRH.2.01.1601070829010.1447@homer01.u.washington.edu>
References:	<CAM2RGhS4L-ch6FEcLtdSt0vA0BdQZvq+AuFDP+9ea7Ftd=AALg AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <8444F816-17CE-4A56-A982-4A60DEDA72B8 AT noqsi DOT com> <alpine DOT LRH DOT 2 DOT 01 DOT 1601040930510 DOT 18447 AT homer02 DOT u DOT washington DOT edu> <AF9F11C6-29A4-4558-85C8-973AB80BADFF AT noqsi DOT com>
	<CAC4O8c_ckyybeLDoV9oGM8cdH08goyqw6zG0eFn4dYdG_wchwg AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <alpine DOT LRH DOT 2 DOT 01 DOT 1601060831110 DOT 31979 AT homer02 DOT u DOT washington DOT edu> <CAC4O8c9k+f49LfgUr6nGLfMG2ewk0c-EwTEmkNA2dGSYL51RPg AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
User-Agent:	Alpine 2.01 (LRH 1217 2009-02-23)
MIME-Version:	1.0
X-PMX-Version:	6.2.1.2493963, Antispam-Engine: 2.7.2.2107409, Antispam-Data: 2016.1.7.163316
X-PMX-Server:	mxout23.cac.washington.edu
X-Uwash-Spam:	Gauge=X, Probability=10%, Report='
	TO_IN_SUBJECT 0.5, HTML_00_01 0.05, HTML_00_10 0.05, BODYTEXTP_SIZE_3000_LESS 0, BODY_SIZE_2000_2999 0, BODY_SIZE_5000_LESS 0, BODY_SIZE_7000_LESS 0, DATE_TZ_NA 0, NO_URI_HTTPS 0, REFERENCES 0, SINGLE_URI_IN_BODY 0, __ANY_URI 0, __BOUNCE_CHALLENGE_SUBJ 0, __BOUNCE_NDR_SUBJ_EXEMPT 0, __CP_URI_IN_BODY 0, __CT 0, __CT_TEXT_PLAIN 0, __FORWARDED_MSG 0, __FRAUD_BODY_WEBMAIL 0, __FRAUD_WEBMAIL 0, __FRAUD_WINNER 0, __HAS_FROM 0, __HAS_MSGID 0, __IN_REP_TO 0, __MIME_TEXT_ONLY 0, __MIME_VERSION 0, __REFERENCES 0, __SANE_MSGID 0, __SINGLE_URI_TEXT 0, __SUBJ_ALPHA_END 0, __SUBJ_ALPHA_NEGATE 0, __TO_IN_SUBJECT 0, __TO_MALFORMED_2 0, __URI_IN_BODY 0, __URI_NS , __USER_AGENT 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 Wed, 6 Jan 2016, Britton Kerin (britton DOT kerin AT gmail DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com] wrote:

> On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 7:42 AM, Frank Miles (fpm AT u DOT washington DOT edu) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com] <geda-user AT delorie DOT com> wrote:
>       On Tue, 5 Jan 2016, Britton Kerin (britton DOT kerin AT gmail DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com] wrote:
>
>             On Mon, Jan 4, 2016 at 1:32 PM, John Doty <jpd AT noqsi DOT com> wrote:
>
>                   On Jan 4, 2016, at 12:35 PM, Frank Miles (fpm AT u DOT washington DOT edu) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com] <geda-user AT delorie DOT com>
>             wrote:
>
>                   > On Tue, 29 Dec 2015, John Doty wrote:
>                   >
>                   > [snip]
>                   >
>                   >> Pcb is struggling from the lack of a foundation. I think geda-gaf would be much more popular if there was a good
>             free/open
>                   layout program to export to. If KiCAD ever documents their netlist format?
>                   >
>                   > There is a way to use gschem to produce KiCAD-compatible netlists: see
>                   >       http://www.gedasymbols.org/user/frank_miles/
>                   >
>                   > This uses an older KiCAD netlist format - but it works.
>                   >
>                   > {I used to use "PCB" but got bit by its incomplete DRC}
> 
>
>             I'm working on DRC at the moment.  Please tell me exactly what got you?
>
>             Britton
>
>       I had a trace that was missing a via.  It's probably been ~2 years, so my
>       memory (just like the connection) may be incomplete.
> 
> And you remember this as a DRC bug.  I'm going to take a guess that you worked through DRC issues until you had none left, and didn't go back and
> "Optimize rats nest" again and watch the message log for the congratulations message.  Sound right?
> 
> I have a branch that improves this situation by just sticking a warning in DRC and I move again that we simply include it as is until a better fix
> comes along.

If "DRC" is incomplete, and it's not made obvious to the user that
other steps need to be taken to ensure that the design check hasn't
really checked everything, then yes, I consider it buggy.

Some kind of warning or prompting to take any extra steps necessary
to ensure design accuracy and completeness would be helpful to 
everyone using the package but not aware of this operator trap.

...and thanks to all for your work on these packages!

 	-Frank

- Raw text -