X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-TCPREMOTEIP: 207.224.51.38
X-Authenticated-UID: jpd AT noqsi DOT com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\))
Subject: Re: [geda-user] About reinventing the wheel, and how to avoid it
From: John Doty <jpd AT noqsi DOT com>
In-Reply-To: <201509111624.t8BGOPYV000685@envy.delorie.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2015 11:27:13 -0600
Message-Id: <F24E14C9-8427-4688-A27A-1EBE0F669995@noqsi.com>
References: <alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 00 DOT 1509111150410 DOT 2482 AT lichen> <B94E2C24-8B63-46FC-A551-9E4B14B817C9 AT noqsi DOT com> <201509111624 DOT t8BGOPYV000685 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com>
To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6)
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by delorie.com id t8BHRgTT010811
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


On Sep 11, 2015, at 10:24 AM, DJ Delorie <dj AT delorie DOT com> wrote:

> 
>> Geda-pcb, by contrast, is top-down with restricted goals and
>> capabilities.
> 
> I like to think of it as "reflecting real-world needs and
> goal-oriented features.”

But they are *your* goals, not everyones.

> 
>> Where geda-gaf describes topology in a general way that has few
>> restrictions,
> 
> I.e. schematics don't have to worry about copper spacing rules, so
> doesn't bother with rules.

But it does have to worry about rules, and those rules are reflected in attributes.

> 
>> geda-pcb has no general basis in geometry.
> 
> Perhaps your theoretical geometry (a layout program is not a 3D cad
> program, no matter how much you gripe about it), but it needs to know
> a lot more about real-world geometry than gschem does, in ways that
> actually benefit real-world layout people.

But your “benefits” only extend to the users who are doing projects that conform to the boundaries you enforce.

> 
>> Where geda-gaf uses attributes in mostly unrestricted ways,
> 
> I.e. gaf doesn't understand attributes at all.

The back ends do. Various scripts do. Good factoring.

> 
>> geda-pcb *enumerates* a restricted subset of possibilities. Adding a
>> small subset of possible layer types to this approach has been
>> cheered as a great advance here.
> 
> We went from two layer types hard-coded to specific layers, to letting
> the user specify an arbitrary layer type on arbitrary layers by name.
> It is a great advance for us, and we should be proud of the fact that
> we're making progress, despite your opposition.
> 
>> Sorry, Nicklas, it makes me shudder.
> 
> Such drama is inappropriate here, I've asked you to stop many times.
> Please stop.

Please lose the attitude that the job of developers is to restrict and control user ambitions.

>> I expect that a xorn-pcb would be as frustrating. Unlike geda-gaf,
>> where the frustrations have been rooted in the implementation, the
>> frustrations of geda-pcb are rooted in the design.
> 
> Feel free to design your own replacement, but stop complaining about
> how we design ours.
> 

I would think, given that you complain a great deal about how gEDA has trouble attracting users, that you might want to pay attention to what its problems are from an actual user’s perspective.

John Doty              Noqsi Aerospace, Ltd.
http://www.noqsi.com/
jpd AT noqsi DOT com