X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f X-Recipient: geda-user AT delorie DOT com X-Original-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=C7vbIUHbpR3pjCIDjVDDdc4tKdCgg5pgkyrXgQS6kOM=; b=tP08uZ6QMdsHWwZD42LVagRQ10XH/+hTCOmmgwNLBbarT3rou8Wpn4gzfM6jXjHi7C U3OR2W+Ud8NHs6P39HAoSLFDA43q4cw2Vam750QKEvvrGIeqvsRJCBwTaFBaW9vyszk7 kBsm0uEBvGqS6u+yKsa1ziCqNTyRnvMoQLrxO8AktMb8F2tnGnqS7nghOql7aqC2QLZn hMZlD6/hhS2I+H2fHvpYLMUCqAJ+mv0zKX3Taq6SIMtxafIU/crfe3HsKvtm/Amb7Fk+ xIakWBDYhg86hOrAYqVSErjGKWUJfuMY0cwjAbSUaR4i7qPtcLLOmhYHxxJpOguaHJir 7cdw== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.202.85.146 with SMTP id j140mr6311046oib.4.1450804412743; Tue, 22 Dec 2015 09:13:32 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <5AC3D5C5-144F-41AE-9562-47BC34D9047F@noqsi.com> References: <5AC3D5C5-144F-41AE-9562-47BC34D9047F AT noqsi DOT com> Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2015 17:13:32 +0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [geda-user] Project leadership From: "Peter Clifton (petercjclifton AT googlemail DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com]" To: gEDA User Mailing List Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by delorie.com id tBMHDZ1Y013532 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 22 December 2015 at 17:01, John Doty wrote: >> KiCAD has had a clear project at most points in its history, and that >> person has been responsible for shaping the development goals, >> strategies and targeting what developer effort they had at their >> disposal. Handover between leaders has (at least in recent times), >> been clear and decisive within the project. (I'm less clear about the >> hand-over from its original author to the first project leader). > > And the result is an inflexible integrated tool rather than a flexible toolkit. We cover the parts of the space that they don’t. It would be great to interoperate with KiCAD. It would be horrible to become more like them: they already have that part of the space covered better than we ever will. I have no idea how you got to your conclusion from that... They have a goal, and a design target - their leadership furthers the goal of achieving that design... I fail to see how the fact they have leadership dictates one design choice over another. We all _GET_ that you don't like the KiCAD design. Do you _GET_ that we're (I) am not trying to force that on gEDA? Peter