Re: gEDA-user: gEDA just hit SlashDotOrg

[John Doty <jpd@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Aug 2, 2009, at 11:27 AM, Jason Childs wrote:

> On Sun, Aug 2, 2009 at 8:42 AM, John Doty<jpd@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> We're not a programming team implementing what Marketing wants. We're
>> a bunch of computer-savvy users implementing what we intend to use.
>> That's our strength. That's why gEDA is different. That's why gEDA is
>> a sharp toolkit for the computer-savvy.
>
> So is this why my simple bsearch patch for hid's hasn't been
> incorporated in 3 months?

No idea: I have nothing to do with pcb. I don't even use it.

> I have to apply it every time I do a pull
> from pcb git so that it doesn't segfault.  I'm sorry, but the tone as
> of late on the mailing list has been "our way or the highway", at
> least from what I've read and encountered on the mailing list.

Well, I may be the crankiest one here. I am very concerned that some  
people don't recognize:

1. pcb is not the only layout tool gEDA supports.

2. ngspice (or gnucap, verilog, whatever your favorite is ...) isn't  
the only simulator.

3. Pointing and clicking is easy in simple cases, but it scales badly  
to large jobs.

4. Some of us have elaborate scripted builds for things like VLSI  
that use the toolkit nature of gEDA to excellent advantage, and fear  
that we will lose this capability.

>   Heck
> I've been afraid to post using gMail for fear of getting kicked from
> the mailing list because of double posting or posting in RTF.  Frankly
> if you can't see the current problems within the geda community that's
> ashame, because it's a reflection of the product too and why thing's
> haven't advanced.

What some don't get is that the product is in many ways *more*  
advanced than the competition. If you don't appreciate this you are  
dangerous. Try using any other tool to draw schematics as input to  
symbolic circuit analysis with Mathematica. The cleanness and  
simplicity of the gEDA toolkit concept make things like this possible.

>   The code base needs some serious refactoring

I agree here. But a qualification for a refactoring of gnetlist, for  
example, is writing and using custom back ends. If you haven't done  
that, you will never understand gnetlist's strengths, and you'll lose  
them.

> to
> advance and you need a programming team to do that work, not users,
> however savvy they are.

Programmers who aren't users will solve the wrong problems.

>   I thought when I converted the gaf source
> from using noweb it would open up a whole new opportunity for actual
> software developers to start contributing, and I now regret the time I
> lost doing it.

Well, I at least appreciate that effort. Doxygen is a lot better:  
thank you. Maybe one of these days I'll understand libgeda well  
enough to work at that level. Your work makes that a more credible  
possibility.

John Doty              Noqsi Aerospace, Ltd.
http://www.noqsi.com/
jpd@xxxxxxxxx




_______________________________________________
geda-user mailing list
geda-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user