Re: gEDA-user: wishful UI

[Armin Faltl <armin.faltl@xxxxxx>]

John Griessen wrote:
> Rick Collins wrote:
> Why not start with what you
> > are trying to do in the layout, consider what the layout tool needs 
> > to make that happen, then trace that back to what is needed in the 
> > schematic to support the layout? 
>
> There are lots of different users of these programs, and they have 
> different goals.
> You're not going to show up and get your way in a FOSS development 
> community
> unless your suggestion is obvious and brilliant at the same time.  IOW
> slim and none.
JG, in my opinion Rick has a point, that without 100% clear definitions from
and for all of those talking here using "subnet", the whole discussion 
has a high
chance of getting nowhere and some of the usecases brought in for support
of the idea seem to come from "Wolkenkuckusheim" [1] for him.
He's never been insulting and I value the practical view of his writing.

As he's less writing, he's probably more routing than me - a reproach I'm
making to myself - I just write here, to keep the future tool useful to me
and found it hard to follow all the discussion.

[1] the term is german and some of the ideas look like from there for me 
(too)
e.g. I make my traces as broad as I see fit or have space in the area, 
so all
the cool design auto blahblah means nothing to me, but a minimum clearance
based on voltage is a good feature.


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