X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Message-ID: <20121220011650.8613.qmail@stuge.se>
Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2012 02:16:50 +0100
From: Peter Stuge <peter AT stuge DOT se>
To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: Define exactly what the DRC does (was: Re: [geda-user] Find
	rat lines)
Mail-Followup-To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
References: <1355863384 DOT 24123 DOT 93 DOT camel AT thinkpad DOT richardbarlow DOT co DOT uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="24zk1gE8NUlDmwG9"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1355863384.24123.93.camel@thinkpad.richardbarlow.co.uk>
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
Precedence: bulk


--24zk1gE8NUlDmwG9
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Richard Barlow wrote:
> Technically what the DRC does currently is correct, it ensures the
> design follows the design rules. However from a usability point of
> view, not having a single central place to provide a list of
> problems with the design is bad.

Perhaps make a new single central place, rather than adding more
things to the current DRC which is already technically correct.

The current DRC would still be there, but maybe an expert option
disabled by default, once the new single central =C3=BCbertest is in
place.


//Peter

--24zk1gE8NUlDmwG9
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFQ0mcChR3Q0dhIfEgRAlUiAJsFSw8FxEd4e0T1V3ghh4X4H7wdtACeO4ia
6Ittd/liuFJVtRGhNadyrNs=
=o7F3
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--24zk1gE8NUlDmwG9--