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:mail-followup-to:references
	:mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent;
	bh=5VF1rkYae8wnocHISe9M780JkXpIFp64DtO5coTzlCA=;
	b=jFxx+sYHP5qcfHKKxCWEkFGLtHT1HqnT0X/gJYJWfAQ01tIyna67gxNkX6O9v7IIsz
	GC2RK+sJN8dxeJdeVvNgiF3Ngf20i/qCDofi5PuQXW2kve349aIbUu/6pQPrz+IQUinG
	S46rk460pV9hor1AG0pVN7444EX+MO/MKZPFX6QnKfO0/K+k5R3dxTy5b90YRQB3gXXo
	4f2qBS9PqOaFKwolJUu1E1UStOEX5BRcQwJv0Tu8ohJaUqgXhydp+lv8+HoVtH6vYPm6
	i7KNYCNRmrF6IEs53DQzXX+G1D2jv0R86bXT0STP9ALZslznTOUsFImvT1eXw1QPjJwF
	yseQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature:	v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
	d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
	h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:subject:message-id:mail-followup-to
	:references:mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent;
	bh=5VF1rkYae8wnocHISe9M780JkXpIFp64DtO5coTzlCA=;
	b=F75CyMpiW1Pw4UElpwGa5wEH4JGaZtSNihrepGX0xZZ44iTMvWvC44nLkourUCMRd7
	Jh+zxv99sgNHjGBJoJI8l2OaFHsGPPRjaD3ykBfbfMe3UTidQnNMrTR6kFX3CFnz8PPU
	YqthqS39BKPhZvvOmFblwQKFcM3it87BEC19JyFfGLHK18cBanhs3SdaqTjUWCpBTCs6
	WnHkwmQK8Eg6XzUY2258qlgtbN1gxHanq3yYLTtCcqA0X2murec3ZRjoJ4ho4ke/AwGg
	ADpGTBRCl6S5MODa1lTFGAiZlA9H9nEbH5AUxScN4isHpCLiHMoHctEzdPYxTpBmKzVA
	CMnQ==
X-Gm-Message-State:	AEkoout6FhK4/SkNymnq2LMjqWEsBz4j2Ffc/L6KHjM06C5VVL18q5vz1m37PwDRXl1p2Q==
X-Received:	by 10.25.146.196 with SMTP id u187mr18436575lfd.224.1470197356729;
	Tue, 02 Aug 2016 21:09:16 -0700 (PDT)
Date:	Wed, 3 Aug 2016 07:09:14 +0300
From:	"Vladimir Zhbanov (vzhbanov 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] scheme re-hash (was: ngspice integration in KiCad)
Message-ID:	<20160803040914.GB2649@localhost.localdomain>
Mail-Followup-To:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
References:	<20160722171754 DOT GB17595 AT localhost DOT localdomain>
	<CAM2RGhRjABmejtuSz1PbGFFF+EHhznGGTODoh0bu2y4FJM=Cbw AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<20160723065723 DOT GC17595 AT localhost DOT localdomain>
	<alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 00 DOT 1607231009290 DOT 7286 AT igor2priv>
	<20160723092248 DOT GF17595 AT localhost DOT localdomain>
	<alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 11 DOT 1607231423480 DOT 2224 AT nimbus>
	<20160724053502 DOT GM17595 AT localhost DOT localdomain>
	<alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 11 DOT 1607271434200 DOT 1841 AT nimbus>
	<20160802091620 DOT GB3728 AT localhost DOT localdomain>
	<20160803040651 DOT 10ac6b40 AT akka>
MIME-Version:	1.0
In-Reply-To:	<20160803040651.10ac6b40@akka>
User-Agent:	Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
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, Aug 03, 2016 at 04:06:51AM +0200, Kai-Martin Knaak wrote:
> "Vladimir Zhbanov  schrieb am  2. August 2016:
> 
> > 2) You seem to have not gotten my reasons for choosing Scheme
> > after many repetitions. I've chosen it chiefly because it has
> > already been the core language of the geda-gaf project.
> 
> So your argument boils down to: 
> 	"Let's keep scheme because we have got scheme."

Nope.

I prefer to evolve what we have rather than throw it away and
start anything from scratch. Reasoning: we have not enough man
power to do such big changes; we'll discourage the users who still
uses gEDA as is if we state that nobody supports it.

> 
> I agree, that hectic change for the sake of change is to be avoided. But
> this should not be extended to mean that the project has to keep
> faithful to every design decision made in the past.  
> 
> 
> > 2) I don't blame anybody if they prefer their `favorite
> > languages'. I just see you want *me* to do anything *your* way,
> 
> Errm, where does Roland ask you to do something his way?
>

Do you think he just asks me to go away (removing guile
beforehand)? ;-)

> 
> > 3) If you want to remove Guile,
> 
> Rolands motivation is not about mainly guile. It is to separate the GUI
> from the handling of data. 

I agree with such a separation, though prefer to evolve the
existing code.

> > it would be more honest to create
> > your own `official' fork,
> 
> ... and add to the fragmentation of the project.
> 
> Note, that pcb successfully demonstrates a more constructive way to deal
> with diverging developer preferences. GTK and Lesstif versions of the
> GUI coexist in the same source tree. 

They all have common infrastructure while xorn is an external
addition with its own build dependences and infrastructure.

> 
> > like Igor2 has done, and do what you
> > want there rather than earn popularity while other developers make
> > hard work on the C and Scheme side.
> 
> Translation: "Go away!"

No, I would offer to create a separate repository for xorn on
geda-project, say geda-xorn, and let Roland administrate it as he
wants. Thus, our users might choose what they like, be less
frustrated (since they would certain that nothing is thrown away
and still evolves), and we perhaps would eventually stop such
language flame wars.

> I'd rather see the other geda developers endorse the already impressive
> results Rolands efforts show. I don't think, the project can afford to
> loose yet another motivated (and skilled) dev.

Be realistic. Now we have only three active devs in geda-gaf (me,
Edward, and Roland). Every one of us has his own vision on how to
develop the project and nobody wants his work went to waste
(including me). My point is: I cannot work in two orthogonal
directions, so I would prefer to see xorn as a fork (which it
really is) in a separate repository. I don't want Roland to stop
working on the project. Who knows, probably some time in future
his project will have a greater user base and support and will
transform gEDA into something new.

> 
> ---<)kaimartin(>---



-- 
  Vladimir

- Raw text -