On Oct 23, 2009, at 11:57 PM, Peter TB Brett wrote: > On Saturday 24 October 2009 07:37:04 Peter TB Brett wrote: >> On Saturday 24 October 2009 00:33:41 Peter Clifton wrote: >>> I'm of the mind that we should (in an ideal world) _remove_ all >>> automatic attribute promotion (perhaps excepting the special case of >>> symversion), and define some new rules as to how an aggregate >>> list of >>> attributes is constructed from a symbol, and attributes inside the >>> schematic. >> >> If I remember correctly, I suggested this,
I agree with both of you that this is correct. >> If you remove these attributes, you will probably break users. >> I know that there are users who turn off attribute promotion, >> and/or have promote-invisible turned on, and/or have stuff inside of >> always-promote-attributes. > > Ales' criteria is, "Changing user workflows is verboten," apparently. And, having been bitten by changes in attribute promotion policy, I also agree with Ales. But I see the issue here somewhat differently. The problem isn't so much that the policy is wrong, but that the code needs refactoring. Workflow-dependent policy should not be hard wired into libgeda: it should be in Scheme functions that can be overridden through gafrc (or perhaps in a file specified by gafrc). John Doty Noqsi Aerospace, Ltd. http://www.noqsi.com/ [email protected] _______________________________________________ geda-user mailing list [email protected] http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
