Mail Archives: geda-user/2016/01/26/22:21:08
On Tue, 26 Jan 2016, Mychaela Falconia wrote:
> DJ Delorie <dj AT delorie DOT com> wrote:
>
>> If you can afford a custom ASIC, you can afford a top-end EDA package,
>
> ... and that top-end EDA package would be PROPRIETARY software, likely
> requiring a proprietary OS underneath. What about those of us who can
> afford to fab PCBs with blind & buried vias, can afford a license for
> PADS/Altium/etc if we wanted that software, but simply want to do our
> work in Free Software instead of the proprietary kind? Free as in
> freedom, not price.
I think some users misunderstood the aftermath thread (I am still very
glad the noone misunderstood or abused the original poll thread, tho!). I
was interested in whether I should take immediate actions to implement
blind/burried vias in pcb-rnd. Since I don't need them, the answer is
"yes" only if there are enough _active users_ who are willing to _invest
some time_ (e.g. testing).
If that's not the case I just waste time implementing a feature that
will not be used by anyone ever. I obviously refuse to do that (am I free
to do that?).
Both PCB mainline and pcb-rnd are free software, and you are perfectly
free to sit down and implement whatever changes/feature you want and use
and distribute the result. However...
>
> The latter reason is why I am here. If I wanted to use proprietary
> software for PCB design, I already have a fully-working, all-features-
> enabled copy of PADS, and I didn't even have to pay for it. But it's
> proprietary sw that requires M$ Windows, which is intolerable to me.
... however, and correct me if I'm wrong, I can't recall you even
answered the 10 questions of the poll running for a week.
So blind/burried is probably not important enough for you to take your
time writing your 10*1 word answer. To me this suggests it won't be
important enough to invest much more time in testing the feature if
someone implements it. (And yet more probably you won't sit down and
invest even more time implementing it.) This how we had 10 answers to the
actual questions and already at least 2x more answers about the
aftermath, arguing and arguing about the same * over.
It doesn't seem like anyone is trying to limit your freedom in any way,
it's more like you didn't step up when you could express your opinion,
when asked for this sort of contribution. I may totally misunderstand
this, but I though freedom was about you are free to take certain
actions, not about we are obligated to do whatever you want, in your
interest, without your slightest contribution.
That said, I am still willing to change my mind and sit down implementing
blind/burried vias in pcb-rnd, if, and only if:
- I start needing them (highly improbable: I've done more than 60 boards
with PCB/pcb-rnd so far and literally never felt the slightest need for
this feature)
- there is real measurable demand from users who are actually willing to
put in some effort (in testing and feedback). You'll have to organize
that group of active users (drop me a mail if it's done and there are at
least 4 users ready to contribute testing; active users as in: actually
spending time on iterations of testing a half-working feature; as in:
investing at least two hours per week without any other benefit
beyond "this may once make blind/burried vias work properly in pcb-rnd").
I beg your pardon if this makes you feel restricted in exercising
your freedom.
Regards,
Igor2
- Raw text -