X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-help-bounces using -f
X-Recipient: geda-help AT delorie DOT com
Date: Tue, 30 May 2017 05:31:08 +0200 (CEST)
X-X-Sender: igor2 AT igor2priv
To: "Bert Timmerman (bert DOT timmerman AT xs4all DOT nl) [via geda-help AT delorie DOT com]" <geda-help AT delorie DOT com>
X-Debug: to=geda-help AT delorie DOT com from="gedah AT igor2 DOT repo DOT hu"
From: gedah AT igor2 DOT repo DOT hu
Subject: Re: [geda-help] Thank you verry much, next Idea - IPC proof
In-Reply-To: <592C88FB.7090202@xs4all.nl>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1705300506290.27212@igor2priv>
References: <20170515111111 DOT 1ba62f47 AT debian> <CAJZxidAk2Ur3B1Hox5_iWJGXiLyYZZXikJnnjxUt_kXUL==CQg AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <20170516163211 DOT 2d920db6 AT debian> <CAJZxidDBoc+HdL9VvCSfuytMTO+g=kLiicJ6HrJSeuo-BCQDgw AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <20170529010708 DOT 29be8939 AT debian>
 <20170529022113 DOT GB12397 AT stuge DOT se> <alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 00 DOT 1705290458510 DOT 27212 AT igor2priv> <20170529105730 DOT 72ab2144 AT debian> <alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 00 DOT 1705291138000 DOT 27212 AT igor2priv> <592C88FB DOT 7090202 AT xs4all DOT nl>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (DEB 1167 2008-08-23)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Reply-To: geda-help AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: geda-help AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk



On Mon, 29 May 2017, Bert Timmerman (bert DOT timmerman AT xs4all DOT nl) [via geda-help AT delorie DOT com] wrote:

>> 
> Why private ?

Because I asked so. I'm a geda* list member since the mid 2000s, I know 
how things can get done and how they get derailed.

If he wants this feature to be implemented in a pcb-rnd parametric 
footprint, we'll need to have a productive, constructive discussion about 
some details. You may like it or not, you may agree or disagree, but my 
experience is that such a thing is more likely to happen in private than 
on geda-help@. (Derailing has already started, just read back the last 
few posts in the thread.)

In other words it's just my decision on how pcb-rnd feature requests are 
done, just like your decision is using launchpad for pcb. Looking at how 
many feature requests we handle succesfully, it looks like my model is 
efficient.

>
> So we can all benefit ?

All pcb-rnd (and related) code are public. The only thing that can keep 
you from the benefits is your own decision.

Parametric footprints are almost 2 years old. All related code was public 
all the time. If any new code is written for an IPC-smt parametric 
footprint, it will be public from day 0 in our public svn.

Does pcb support those parametric footprints?

Regards,

Igor2