Re: gEDA-user: Flexibility and capability

[Chris Smith <cjs94@xxxxxxxxxx>]

John Doty wrote:
> On Sep 30, 2009, at 2:29 AM, spuzzdawg wrote:
>>
>> This is the line of argument I really have an issue with. I mean  
>> making it easier to use by someone who doesn't want to command line  
>> everything.
> 
> Does every tool have to be dumbed down to serve the computer- 
> illiterate? This is what really worries me. Finally, I have access to  
> a tool that makes it possible to actually use the power of the  
> computer to help a computer-literate part-timer like me be really  
> productive, and some people want to dumb it down to be like all the  
> other tools.

We're not talking about dumbing down.  We're talking about adding a few
features to allow users to get results quickly, without having to master
the tools first.

As an obvious example, consider a digital SLR camera.  My camera allows
me to control every function to achieve the photo I want: shutter speed,
aperture, ISO, flash timings, etc.  To use those settings correctly I
had to spend a lot of time reading about photography.  However, the
camera also has an 'Auto' setting which, as a novice user, allowed me to
just press the button and get a good photo.  The addition of an 'Auto'
function in no way detracts from the ability to use the camera manually.

> Scriptable data flow means that a simple "make" can rebuild all  
> project data products, without requiring that the designer remember  
> the details of a flow from years ago. At the same time, one can adapt  
> the flow to the project's needs, not some narrow channel the tool  
> requires. The Makefile formally documents many of the details of the  
> project's structure and flow (of course informal comments are also  
> helpful, and the Makefile is a good place to collect them, too).
> 
> Simple, transparent file formats mean that "textutils" processing of  
> files is easy and very effective. It only took me a few minutes to  
> write my pins2gsch script, but it has already saved me many hours of  
> work.

That really is the issue, isn't it?  All the talk about gEDA's clean
interfaces really boils down to the fact that it uses an open file
format that other tools and scripts can easily interpret.

You seem afraid that integration means that gEDA and PCB will become
fused into a single entity, and that the schematic file format will
become corrupted, or disappear entirely.  I see nothing that justifies
that fear.

Chris
-- 
Chris Smith <cjs94@xxxxxxxxxx>



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