X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at neurotica.com
X-Original-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=neurotica.com;
	s=default; t=1487179390;
	bh=ADSJ33DPNFRG/UCfKD9Ddc8Q8aDShhpIpjAQ7SnoLAE=;
	h=Subject:To:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To;
	b=ca0ZKgGVqARrHDMhOECdpAGHLnJ0bSKAYhGVosRLIUEn7O2k1gHuNsmBCbLoGcAf+
	 +JvD1Y9aKdvjRsJ9FySOa3hyCpgUwGKOVkdH7jdf1HwongPI+6F7CxKdR7gck+9rHq
	 mycgfJp+Y34W+E+6Zsjxu7qFqyfmtB7SmitqCy8w=
Subject: Re: alternatives (was Re: [geda-user] New gEDA/gaf features)
To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
References: <alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 11 DOT 1702141710390 DOT 14019 AT nimbus>
 <s6nefz0a72x DOT fsf AT blaulicht DOT dmz DOT brux>
 <1bab2e83-fc06-10c9-7dee-8fd88af6be7d AT s5tehnika DOT net>
 <6978404a-1dcf-3691-bcdf-233d24cdf8d2 AT neurotica DOT com>
 <CAC4O8c-xVjckET_giRMujnG2gbCtPGPXrEQF_3oVq18Y=Qy6VQ AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
 <alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 00 DOT 1702150413430 DOT 7286 AT igor2priv>
 <1C50CDB8-1F40-4595-BA8F-E97B80817EE7 AT noqsi DOT com>
From: "Dave McGuire (mcguire AT neurotica DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com]" <geda-user AT delorie DOT com>
Message-ID: <b17fb3f4-476a-3f33-0e20-a430c43371c5@neurotica.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2017 12:23:07 -0500
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/45.7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <1C50CDB8-1F40-4595-BA8F-E97B80817EE7@noqsi.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by delorie.com id v1FHND4b026726
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 02/15/2017 11:45 AM, John Doty wrote:
> The problem is that gEDA isn’t a fixed, unified tool with a single
> way to do things. It’s a collection of *customizable* tools. gEDA’s
> great success has been the ability to make a netlist for any purpose
> with a modest amount of Scheme coding. That’s how it’s able to
> support pcb, which was not part of gEDA originally.

   Whilst I agree with this, and I feel that flexibility and 
customizability are great, this is once again a statement of your 
opinion.  In MY opinion (you didn't ask for it, but I didn't ask for 
yours either), gEDA's great success is that it's readily available, 
free, (sorta-)multi-platform, and I can...sit down and make circuit boards.

   I may be "wearing blinders" here, but I believe the vast majority of 
us do just that...make circuit boards.  Nearly all of our efforts 
eventually end up that way; that's the point.

   That's why I personally have no issue with a slight bias toward a 
PC-board-centric workflow (pcb, pcb-rnd, or otherwise) in gEDA.

              -Dave

-- 
Dave McGuire, AK4HZ
New Kensington, PA