John P. Doty wrote: > > The people who seem to appreciate your work don't seem to understand > gEDA. They expect something like the "do everything poorly with one > tool" approach that is so distressingly common in software these days. A > kit of tools, each of which does one thing well, is alien. But that's > gEDA, that's its strength. >
For the record, I just said I liked his documentation and website--- and pled ignorance on everything else. :) Look, I'll first apologize for starting this whole thing by calling you names, John. I intended it in jest, but obviously my email didn't make that clear enough. Sorry. It was inappropriate behavior from me, to say the least. I agree that one of gEDA's strengths is that each component does one thing, and does it very well. That fact alone has made it much easier for me to get my head around the small parts of it that I need to get my relatively modest designs done. It looks like Anthony has re-invented a wheel, and that's difficult to accept. But his motivation to contribute is no less commendable as a result, and I really do appreciate his effort--- and I suspect that you do too, John. I know he would love to hear that. In the bigger picture, I'll note that the tutorials and FAQs I've seen for gEDA all focus on a pretty specific workflow, which is to turn a schematic into a circuit board layout. There are obviously a zillion different ways that the tools would be useful, and I would really appreciate it if someone would write a few of them down! I'm a Contributing Editor for Embedded Systems Design magazine. If anyone wants to help me co-author a few short articles on using gEDA for things like circuit board layout, schematic capture, simulations, and whatever else it's good for, I'd be more than happy to give you ample credit and to assist in whatever capacity I can to see to it that the documents get published. They should be good candidates for the Wiki, too! If we can get some word out, and commit to documenting some of the really cool ways people are solving problems with gEDA, then I think we'll all get along a _lot_ better. We'll focus our efforts on the parts of gEDA that are truly lacking (and even identify them!). And we'd call more attention to the project, too. <bluto> "Now who's with me?" </bluto> b.g. -- Bill Gatliff [email protected] _______________________________________________ geda-user mailing list [email protected] http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
