On 10/11/2010 3:27 PM, Brian F. G. Bidulock wrote: > Dick, > > On Mon, 11 Oct 2010, Dick Hollenbeck wrote: >> >> Look, I just want to re-iterate the concerns I brought up about this 6 >> months ago. >> >> I did not think it was a good idea then, and I still feel that way. In >> general, we welcome your contributions. You bring a great deal of >> expertise to the project. >> >> But when your contributions start to feel like a body blow inflicted >> with a whole slab of beef, rather than bite sized incremental >> improvements that we can digest and understand in a few minutes, some >> folks begin to question this. And I am not speaking only about me. >> >> At some point it becomes an imposition, and overly presumptuous that we >> have to eat the whole slab of beef without time to even look at it, or >> cut it into smaller pieces. >> >> Its time to focus on what it will take to be a team player. Being >> right, bringing excellent beef, may not be the only thing important at >> this point. > > What are you talking about? Metric units? > > Metric units is a no-brainer. Every _other_ PCB CAD system has been > using them for, oh, about the last 30 years or so. For some of the > technical problems that results from a poor selection of internal units, > see my other notes on this thread.
I agree with your internal units assessment, but this the last argument I would use to rationalize the change. I can hear my mom's voice "If everyone else was jumping off a cliff, would you do it too?" :) > > For more of my thinking on the changes that I have embarked upon, > see the current copy of my design notes here: > > http://www.openss7.org/docs/NOTES.pdf > > Warning: only start reading this if you are interested in several hundred > pages of ramblings. > > As for putting up a branch, I would, but I don't need a whole PPA thing, I > don't care to sign any agreement. If someone can direct me towards some > quick pointers for setting up a bzr branch somewhere where you all can get > at it, let me know and I'll see about doing it. I did not have to sign any PPA to commit code to Launchpad. I think as long as you have your developer profile configured properly you should be able to publish your branch. See the "Publishing your branch with Launchpad" section of: http://doc.bazaar.canonical.com/bzr.dev/en/mini-tutorial/index.html > > As to incremental changes, I believe we discussed those before: all > siginificant progress requires a quantuum leap or rewrite at some point: > just like the EESCHEMA library code. What Dick is doing does not disrupt the current code base. Changing the internal units has the potential to. I see no reason why the internal units change could not have been made incrementally. It may take a bit more work to make changes incrementally but I think it is a sound development model. I submit the Linux kernel as my example. Each new branch of the kernel has been fairly incremental in order to avoid instability. I see Dick's work like adding new device driver to the kernel rather than a core kernel code. If the device driver doesn't work, we just don't get to use that device. If EESchema doesn't work, then we don't get to lay out schematics. Wayne > > --brian > > _______________________________________________ > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers > Post to : [email protected] > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp > _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
