al davis wrote: > >> 1. a maintained Windows binary installer; and > > Nobody here is opposed to it. Somebody needs to do it, and make > a commitment to maintaining it. How about you? What exactly is involved in that? Is it simply (he says! :)) a case of compiling, packaging and making available a binary version of the latest stable snapshot? >> 2. some simple GUI project/workflow manager -- can't really >> expect the Windows users to manually edit project files and >> use the command line. > > If you think a GUI is the solution, you are missing the point. > A truly good project/workflow manager will sit in the > background, invisible, and magically do what you need. You seem to be implying some kind of telepathy... > We have had a dozen or so attempts at a GUI so far. None of > them have really worked well because they all miss the point. And what is that point they have all missed? Someone pointed me at xgsch2pcb, which seems to be exactly what I am looking for; what do you think are the problems with it? > Schematic, layout, netlist, and others are just alternative > views of the same object. If you need to manually do anything > to go from one to another within the system, it isn't working. I'm not sure I follow your reasoning. Are you saying that gEDA is broken because it doesn't keep layout and schematic data in the same file? How do you see it working in your ideal world? > I don't see what is so hard about "gschem foo.sch". I don't see > how those project managers make it any easier, but their > complexity is like a complexity that windows users have seen > before and already been hardened to. There is a real problem > here that we are not addressing. We are talking about two completely different mindsets here. *nix users are used to the *nix philosophy, so are comfortable with command lines and chaining multiple, small 'filters' to achieve a result. It is not hard for us, because we are accustomed to it. Windows users are accustomed to a world where files are open by double-clicking on them, and sharing data between applications is achieved using 'import' and 'export' menu options. When I think of a project manager I'm thinking about something like xgschem2pcb, something that hides the exact details of the command line behind a couple of nice, friendly buttons. While it's not the way I prefer to work, I fail to see how that adds complexity. It is just a simpler way of achieving the same thing. What 'real problem' are we not addressing? Chris -- Chris Smith <cjs94@xxxxxxxxxx>
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ geda-user mailing list geda-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user