X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
        h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date
         :message-id:subject:from:to:content-type;
        bh=1tG76LUjCxP4s/kUq/6ZYcZFR+28xwIZPvh+rg/EUL4=;
        b=dNvRL2J0xWLaOsl4lunP4XTL5kxkmM/Jt/3lkVms2l2Nh15Nfc38wWClZ1obQJH8vp
         tZhIyuiEbVF2j/WPDrUfoOsAZV/b3EcVir6OEMwXPmvEBcnpIZAQ8bWEGbBEQ6zl9SQ7
         9wNWnYYJ+fM0QGjX+pd4FxseHOSqmwckBbT7gR7YN7w8GQ25xQua2Wp5ks0vQFq18SA6
         1uZfTXyC3KJkKEeGEZfTZPZLsktM6l2pUKPaZI6/sYExpI8i4rlGpVO+RcWHH5bobFF3
         NPXQndJYRDmI4XagYNM6wOozTSElTDNoH0Sbvy0G+aoWguCXzIqJWAzlZyC2py6+BOm9
         lwmA==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlLrxGmDkqXdYsn1nZ8b6HDLAyBhdwRc9hu37OxXIld0P+mFNm4EhvS09AmJdy2xvvcN9kw
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.224.96.138 with SMTP id h10mr3947494qan.46.1394731017118;
 Thu, 13 Mar 2014 10:16:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Originating-IP: [62.221.5.234]
In-Reply-To: <lfsllu$ot$1@ger.gmane.org>
References: <CANqhZFyfm9+YpNrz_UgEx_RGf0P6bdooa+7NM3X5hkFQZAOU9w AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<CANqhZFypYpqRP73=vxap2evvXpiQM_Wawyn995BH7MTzE=dr6g AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<lfsllu$ot$1 AT ger DOT gmane DOT org>
Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2014 17:16:57 +0000
Message-ID: <CANqhZFwD2sX9oYR3CNodRiT4g_JzLbWESsOYtDwFEfTmd+G_vw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [geda-user] Re: Proposal: don't install less-used utility scripts
From: Gareth Edwards <gareth AT edwardsfamily DOT org DOT uk>
To: "geda-user AT delorie DOT com" <geda-user AT delorie DOT com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
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

Hi Kai-Martin,

On 13 March 2014 16:17, Kai-Martin Knaak <knaak AT iqo DOT uni-hannover DOT de> wrote:
> I'd be completely fine with this approach. But this is to be expected as I
> never touched any other work-flow than gschem->pcb->gerbv. I don't see
> that I am tempted to use any of the utilities in the future.
>

Thanks for the supportive comment :).

I think one of the reasons for moving rather than deleting is that if
anyone is inconvenienced by the removal they will notice and we can
consider moving it back. I'm optimistic that we won't need to, though.

Thanks
Gareth