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=gmail.com; s=20120113;
        h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to;
        bh=3m93D7Ld/xoqoTA+L5d++LkaLTUW8fWUI1TQkID9PfQ=;
        b=Jv3v6e+0sSm3ULij/sSQERWnx7H58LPq6w09eCyBK6VHiUAuV0ZWqb6PcV3/Riz7lX
         TiceG701wKPhmjOVw5zOqgd8MTOEjC25rHmcvATQmmbGWzfM6JdNPz+0jBMZYGqUOu7t
         7rgJzOFstsKbt3CcbElagLrjIffyYtTfQgkmnAizksi/QZzNNjxyqClclZAhRb1cW5+j
         KW1c1YhKfLqUg7SB8j3l5bNR1Mw+7nMakhwMboINpO7M0FK3T6DHSKcU/kEC2GtfMfO0
         gfYjiTO45LkCicJoZU/EMWYEnHHZh0CzoU9U7b31rudnquIzOnuMrTIeIsmYE/iWn1/5
         lQNw==
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:from:date
         :message-id:subject:to;
        bh=3m93D7Ld/xoqoTA+L5d++LkaLTUW8fWUI1TQkID9PfQ=;
        b=bOZgce6ZO0Ipocj0L6b/ylM3WVQze9eXuWUCvZaFxo5FaYONEG3ETjHHZa3kVkTIeM
         jXTtc1sZpRzWDjJdH2OSir8LYLd8ZNaw5yon8MJUJsYz25ClBLr60hqTnn+QADnonsb9
         fVwBZpWPURDfyKvFlouFmDCjGEEPAeO2mFroSV2IAQhsJ+h4H/9PmJxpr2RJ6D7Aa75d
         xSxlCsaPwLseKYzpby4RcZHLlTCwWgYgjFBQjPJoRmHNjRVNUfp+Z96W7xoesiftdUYS
         VERxkKUmRGM0fdtPrHVGO/LkW+gd4Pxf7v4tgmZv85GtCfYqnZphgDEEcnreiCskTOFg
         5v8g==
X-Gm-Message-State: AEkoousV+9AFlyPi4IGMsvkvOyx7/dxk0g9W7p5SQYDAe6/o9o7Xzj45KnqVOFBQ/g+qTI0OMq0+ivy+Q0aG0A==
X-Received: by 10.200.57.34 with SMTP id s31mr33187731qtb.49.1469485504671;
 Mon, 25 Jul 2016 15:25:04 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <98D1C4E4-581D-4A03-94E4-E0330960EADF@wellesley.edu>
References: <98D1C4E4-581D-4A03-94E4-E0330960EADF AT wellesley DOT edu>
From: "Marvin Dickens (mpdickens AT gmail DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com]" <geda-user AT delorie DOT com>
Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2016 18:25:03 -0400
Message-ID: <CANEvwqhmUKnqX_kC7jgarumgXWzxygdRC=M=toBYMoJohXxdcg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [geda-user] Stay or go?
To: geda-user <geda-user AT delorie DOT com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1141ca4882353f05387d4101
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

--001a1141ca4882353f05387d4101
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Please note this email is not a troll as I have been on this list way over
a decade. With that said, here it comes:

We asked ourselves the exact same question a little over 12 months ago and
concluded we needed to purchase licenses to a well
known commercial EDA suite. With that said,  Free software is the future.
OTOH, gEDA developers have to figure out how to move forward
embrace current and future user needs (The usual stuff like: usability,
modern work flow, modern gui and etc...) Candidly, at our organization,
we do not see this happening. What we see are personality clashes between
developers and an unwillingness to embrace change, new technology
or new paradigms in computer science of any type or kind - Even though in
computer science and engineering change is a certainty. OTOH, we
have no room to complain because gEDA developers create code gratis and a
reasonable argument can be made that if I or anyone else is unhappy with
the state of things we can write the additions and/or changes ourselves.
This dynamic makes it impossible to include the tool set in our
business plan - Its too risky.

So, After great debate, we jumped ship.  But, did not do it in haste. We
continue to read the list and keep a couple of workstations with gEDA loade=
d
in the event we need to revisit a design. I suppose what I am saying is
this suite is now a legacy in our workflow - This does not make me happy,
but it's the way it is. In fact, I'd go as far as to say its a shame.


Regards

Marvin

On Sat, Jul 23, 2016 at 10:16 AM, James Battat (jbattat AT wellesley DOT edu) [via
geda-user AT delorie DOT com] <geda-user AT delorie DOT com> wrote:

> Dear gEDA folks,
>
> I=E2=80=99ve used gschem/pcb for several (modest) boards now, and love ma=
ny things
> about it.
> I do not love what I perceive to be deep friction and lack of cooperation
> among developers.
>
> It makes me wonder how long gschem/pcb will endure.  And therefore I must
> decide if, as a user, I should invest any more effort to learning the
> platform and building up custom footprint/schematic libraries, etc, or
> instead transition now to another platform.
>
> This may be an unfair question to ask on this forum, but here goes:
>
> What do you see as drawbacks to KiCad (wrt gschem/pcb)?  I=E2=80=99m on t=
he fence
> about transitioning away from gschem/pcb.  Why should I stay?
>
> James
>
>
>
>

--001a1141ca4882353f05387d4101
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><div>Please note this email is not a troll as I have been =
on this list way over a decade. With that said, here it comes:</div><div><b=
r></div>We asked ourselves the exact same question a little over 12 months =
ago and concluded we needed to purchase licenses to a well<div>known commer=
cial EDA suite. With that said, =C2=A0Free software is the future. OTOH, <s=
pan class=3D"" id=3D":1id.1" tabindex=3D"-1" style=3D"">gEDA</span> develop=
ers have to figure out how to move forward</div><div>embrace current and fu=
ture user needs (The usual stuff like: usability, modern work flow, modern =
<span class=3D"" id=3D":1id.2" tabindex=3D"-1" style=3D"">gui</span> and et=
c...) Candidly, at our organization,</div><div>we do not see this happening=
. What we see are personality clashes between developers and an unwillingne=
ss to embrace change, new technology</div><div>or new paradigms=C2=A0in com=
puter science of any type or kind - Even though in computer science and eng=
ineering change is a certainty. OTOH, we</div><div>have no room to complain=
 because <span class=3D"" id=3D":1id.5" tabindex=3D"-1" style=3D"">gEDA</sp=
an> developers create code gratis and a reasonable argument can be made tha=
t if I or anyone else is unhappy with the state of things we can write the =
additions and/or changes ourselves. This dynamic makes it impossible to inc=
lude the tool set in our=C2=A0</div><div>business plan - Its too risky.</di=
v><div><br></div><div>So, After great debate, we jumped ship.=C2=A0 But, di=
d not do it in haste. We continue to read the list and keep a couple of wor=
kstations with <span class=3D"" id=3D":1id.6" tabindex=3D"-1" style=3D"">gE=
DA</span> loaded</div><div>in the event we need to revisit a design. I supp=
ose what I am saying is this suite is now a legacy in our workflow - This d=
oes not make me happy,</div><div>but it&#39;s the way it is. In fact, I&#39=
;d go as far as to say its a shame.</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div=
>Regards</div><div><br></div><div>Marvin</div><div><div><div class=3D"gmail=
_extra"><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Sat, Jul 23, 2016 at 10:16 AM, Ja=
mes <span class=3D"" id=3D":1id.14" tabindex=3D"-1" style=3D"">Battat</span=
> (<a href=3D"mailto:jbattat AT wellesley DOT edu" target=3D"_blank"><span class=
=3D"" id=3D":1id.15" tabindex=3D"-1" style=3D"">jbattat</span>@<span class=
=3D"" id=3D":1id.16" tabindex=3D"-1" style=3D"">wellesley</span>.<span clas=
s=3D"" id=3D":1id.17" tabindex=3D"-1" style=3D"">edu</span></a>) [via <a hr=
ef=3D"mailto:geda-user AT delorie DOT com" target=3D"_blank"><span class=3D"" id=
=3D":1id.18" tabindex=3D"-1" style=3D"">geda</span>-user@<span class=3D"" i=
d=3D":1id.19" tabindex=3D"-1" style=3D"">delorie</span>.com</a>] <span dir=
=3D"ltr">&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:geda-user AT delorie DOT com" target=3D"_blank"><sp=
an class=3D"" id=3D":1id.20" tabindex=3D"-1" style=3D"">geda</span>-user@<s=
pan class=3D"" id=3D":1id.21" tabindex=3D"-1" style=3D"">delorie</span>.com=
</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin=
:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204)=
;border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">Dear gEDA folks,<br>
<br>
I=E2=80=99ve used gschem/pcb for several (modest) boards now, and love many=
 things about it.<br>
I do not love what I perceive to be deep friction and lack of cooperation a=
mong developers.<br>
<br>
It makes me wonder how long gschem/pcb will endure.=C2=A0 And therefore I m=
ust decide if, as a user, I should invest any more effort to learning the p=
latform and building up custom footprint/schematic libraries, etc, or inste=
ad transition now to another platform.<br>
<br>
This may be an unfair question to ask on this forum, but here goes:<br>
<br>
What do you see as drawbacks to KiCad (wrt gschem/pcb)?=C2=A0 I=E2=80=99m o=
n the fence about transitioning away from gschem/pcb.=C2=A0 Why should I st=
ay?<br>
<span><font color=3D"#888888"><br>
James<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
</font></span></blockquote></div><br></div></div></div></div>

--001a1141ca4882353f05387d4101--