X-Authentication-Warning:	delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Date:	Sun, 12 Feb 2017 17:00:25 +0100 (CET)
From:	Roland Lutz <rlutz AT hedmen DOT org>
To:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Subject:	Re: [geda-user] #pragma backannot
In-Reply-To:	<alpine.DEB.2.00.1702121430580.7286@igor2priv>
Message-ID:	<alpine.DEB.2.11.1702121645300.11516@nimbus>
References:	<alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 00 DOT 1702121430580 DOT 7286 AT igor2priv>
User-Agent:	Alpine 2.11 (DEB 23 2013-08-11)
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 Sun, 12 Feb 2017, gedau AT igor2 DOT repo DOT hu wrote:
> I am not pushing it because I'd need it for pcb-rnd. I already have a 
> gaf "fork: with fully working back annot for myself and for those who 
> want to use the feature, so honestly, as an user or developer I don't 
> really care if it makes it into any of the other "forks".

To make it more visible, I added your code to the geda-gaf repository as 
the branch home/rlutz/igor2-ba.

After a first look at it, I think the code would need some cleanup, but I 
don't see a fundamental reason why it shouldn't be merged into geda-gaf. 
I wouldn't be comfortable deciding this on my own, though.

> So if you are still with me and want to be pragmatic on this, you could 
> just jump on it and solve this issue in a weekend.

The problem is not solving it technically (the code exists), it is 
deciding whether to use your solution, to implement it another way, or to 
not implement it at all.  This list has a reputation for not coming to any 
conclusion in this kind of question.

- Raw text -