X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2015 14:46:06 -0400
Message-Id: <201509161846.t8GIk6Dm010388@envy.delorie.com>
From: DJ Delorie <dj AT delorie DOT com>
To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
In-reply-to:
	<CAM2RGhQVThXyZDX7vfBNY3-8SgA0gH78bc30swP-EWzTEVr5WA AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	(geda-user AT delorie DOT com)
Subject: Re: [geda-user] off-topic: key bindings
References: <alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 00 DOT 1509131209260 DOT 6924 AT igor2priv>
	<55F5EFB6 DOT 6050809 AT ecosensory DOT com>
	<alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 00 DOT 1509140349440 DOT 6924 AT igor2priv>
	<20150914100244 DOT 4c371d64616a1ca14f7e3912 AT gmail DOT com>
	<alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 00 DOT 1509161940580 DOT 3528 AT lichen>
	<201509161753 DOT t8GHr83L007994 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com> <CAM2RGhQVThXyZDX7vfBNY3-8SgA0gH78bc30swP-EWzTEVr5WA AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
Reply-To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com


> That is inarguable but meanwhile you have a user base that adopted the
> current ones. This is why there should be at least two options.

Sure, which is why we haven't really changed them in a while.  EDA is
a specialty function that requires consideration for special needs,
such as custom key bindings.  It's always a compromise unless you give
all control to the user, which may cause more harm than good if the
user isn't an expert on choosing key bindings.