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: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_4A61DF4C-CE2A-44BB-AFD0-A6B97A70B8BE"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha512 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\)) Subject: Re: [geda-user] Internal vs. user-visible changes X-Pgp-Agent: GPGMail From: John Doty In-Reply-To: Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2017 09:40:38 -0700 Message-Id: <39A06482-D0DA-4041-AA98-B8257BEA45F9@noqsi.com> References: To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6) 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 --Apple-Mail=_4A61DF4C-CE2A-44BB-AFD0-A6B97A70B8BE Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 On Feb 14, 2017, at 9:08 AM, Roland Lutz wrote: > In the past, I have followed a very conservative approach about = user-visible changes. I improved the inner workings of gEDA/gaf to make = future improvements easier while putting a lot of effort into not = changing anything exposed to the user. When I thought a user-visible = change would make sense, I would post it to this list to see if there = was a consensus in favor of it. You never really recruited users to customize your thing the way Ales = did for gnetlist. It=92s all your show. A good show, but nobody=92s = vision covers the whole gEDA landscape. >=20 > The problem is that this didn't work. For any proposal, even for = features which have been requested by many users, there were some people = opposing them because they would have preferred me to implement it = another way; at the same time, people kept flaming me about internal = changes which didn't affect them at all. >=20 =93Internal changes=94. Your head is in the developer/consumer model, = not the toolkit for users model. > On Sun, 12 Feb 2017, gedau AT igor2 DOT repo DOT hu wrote: >> Let's assume users weight refactorings and cleanups and = elegance-of-code a bit lower than actual features they need in daily = use. >=20 > I think my approach has been wrong. Instead of offering a solid = infrastructure and waiting for the actual solutions to follow, I should = have put equal emphasis on *using* the new possibilities. There is no = point in cleaning up the code unless you intend to do something with it. >=20 > gEDA/gaf now has back annotation, parametric subschematics, and custom = power symbols without a ":1" suffix. Expect more to follow. >=20 >=20 Making a KiCAD rival is not a viable strategy for gEDA. John Doty Noqsi Aerospace, Ltd. http://www.noqsi.com/ jpd AT noqsi DOT com --Apple-Mail=_4A61DF4C-CE2A-44BB-AFD0-A6B97A70B8BE Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Comment: GPGTools - https://gpgtools.org iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJYozMHAAoJEF1Aj/0UKykRSDoP/icVIBxYd/KajZ6wAprVk2JQ XK39tIDkzg/VUv+ijo+CGyi4waLoba5cDBDW8FWp04flYexWwxCXg4JqcuQxXLbx zkz3BmuGpoeOZlmBfvTzqUR/pkw5l5+f8UXYfDXQIi8+0PuIVLMT/BrhTeqxOInH gy8wBGi8Dig1u+lOVR+74az1MG5UjZJIWQi+KCDTT3XGWH0zsdCVDBVWOSd3zKEM /dO89hSA1QLUrsXOCr1zHRJEHUKXiyhTnlvuUe8LBgm5C4gija/5phng9HlvRnBq BZQeMidG4QH247rj1Ro5SNay4hkVHKm51vnvO2FGpJ9X+NOA50IChs/UaKA9uAbA 3DzC/fZp1WQFU/K87tihE9xJCWnbK8j/3wMkfQfeHfXSPxEytEMG6uOi/9pQNB0s +2r7eJKJERMqANTVskMPoX4DcMJ1sqHjI54KiOJRITKC1WUWiFhheheR67cRS7fZ Ipt9LgcYThcEHBgmsJlJzsrqr6OHwiFdfo+6CtiOjOJPzyxq4zQDoabjYwn5lexu n5UNahSP0sT+mQ2DHDyM371B2+x0lsJXv/mYvjFM1prSliw6OAWaN2XEnPbrtWI3 LJ9M1dEYuzHwyt4sKkiEYfXZS9bKuqn5/TUWSZ1rzw8kKVpxSLFbRTpHcSc8nW+S Z69iG0PBz4Luc5nOhyIO =xCx9 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Apple-Mail=_4A61DF4C-CE2A-44BB-AFD0-A6B97A70B8BE--