X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f X-Recipient: geda-user AT delorie DOT com X-Mailer: exmh version 2.8.0 04/21/2012 with nmh-1.6 X-Exmh-Isig-CompType: repl X-Exmh-Isig-Folder: inbox From: karl AT aspodata DOT se To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com Subject: Re: [geda-user] Re: Project file In-reply-to: References: <20180723152807 DOT 13d27cadcd023b63aa3fd9c0 AT gmail DOT com> <20180723174658 DOT 32979841DEBA AT turkos DOT aspodata DOT se> <20180723195942 DOT 605CB841DEBA AT turkos DOT aspodata DOT se> <20180724132731 DOT 76074841DEBC AT turkos DOT aspodata DOT se> <20180724161712 DOT f0082dda1044e41179fa82f0 AT gmail DOT com> <20180724145644 DOT 122BA841DEC5 AT turkos DOT aspodata DOT se> Comments: In-reply-to "John Griessen (john AT ecosensory DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com]" message dated "Wed, 25 Jul 2018 10:38:27 -0500." Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Message-Id: <20180725165904.A71B3841DEC6@turkos.aspodata.se> Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2018 18:59:04 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV using ClamSMTP 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 John Griessen: > On Wed, 25 Jul 2018, Roland Lutz wrote: > > I think the fact that John's use case is much more complex than > > what you are currently modelling for is *exactly* why you two > > should be talking to each other. > > "Case is much more complex" doesn't sound like a match to me. > Why would they work together when goals are not aligned, > and they have long differences of style? (My geuess is that your question is to Roland Lutz or John Doty, but I answer anyhow) Look, I honestly don't like lihata file format (or rather the verbosity), but that doesn't mean I'm unwilling to learn it so that I can cooperate better with others. Just by having different goals isn't something that hinders me to use and learn useful things from others. Also different level of use case complexity isn't something that should hinder people to cooperate. Though people that are angry at each others, they are better not get in each others way even though from a technical standpoint they should gain doing so. > It's too bad you don't see cooperating with pcb-rnd used along with > gschem. Who are you talking to now? > Maybe lepton is a way to go untild cschem, but I've not had much > response when I ask lepton questions. The lepton people has answered my questions, and has only seen friendly faces from them. Perhaps you hit someones bad day. Also, remember that mail is a medium that misses many dimension compared to talking face to face, and that may be a cause for misunderstanding and frustrations. Remember also that people who are not native english speakers (like me) do have a tendancy to get words and phrases wrong. > Meanwhile, I use gschem of the same version, gschem 1.9.2 (g53ec833), > as several years ago and hear hints there is new development of a > few bug fixes, but cannot find how to access these new versions of > gschem. gschem 1.9.2 (g53ec833) regularly segfaults. For me, the easiest way is to compile from the repository, if you need help with that mail me privately. Regards, /Karl Hammar ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Aspö Data Lilla Aspö 148 S-742 94 Östhammar Sweden