On May 6, 2010, at 9:28 PM, Jared Casper wrote: > Sorry, bored tonight and want to jump in... ;) > > On Thu, May 6, 2010 at 6:07 PM, John Doty <j...@noqsi.com> wrote: >> I encourage people to contribute to gedasymbols. Where is your contribution? >> > > If gedasymbols is good, what's wrong with a tool to allow easier > access to a gedasymbols-like-but-more-organized database?
Adding unnecessary layers to software makes it harder to use, not easier. It's already easy to pull things from gedasymbols. > >> Not true. If the database behind the GUI tool is inadequate, the GUI gets in >> the way. Users will have to get used to reaching around it anyway. That will >> drive away everyone who thinks it should actually work, while the few >> remaining will drop back to the workable flow, and the cute GUI feature will >> have only driven people away. >> > > Those that would be driven away by the fact that such a database isn't > complete and perfect will almost certainly be driven away by the > current situation. But if gEDA is perfect as is and no more features > should be added, why does it matter if people are driven away? An > open source project typically wants more users to have more > contributors, but if contributions are unnecessary (or contributions > are ignored, but that's another story) then it doesn't matter if > people are driven away. I have nothing against more users or more contributors. I have much against undisciplined development, particularly the notion that "features" have intrinsic value. I have much against unfactored monoliths. I have much against narrowly targeted solutions as opposed to flexible tools. > >> Ah, but it does have to be perfect. Otherwise there will be lots of whining >> about what a piece of crap gEDA is. People won't be able to find their >> favorite component. People will design boards, fabricate them, and be >> shocked when pin numbers turn out to be wrong. >> > > http://www.jwz.org/doc/worse-is-better.html > >> Sure. Contribute your symbols to gedasymbols. I encourage this. But the >> delusion that this can somehow lead to a situation where a user can just >> pick a component from a menu without both careful checking and customization >> is damaging. >> > > Just because it is hard and tedious to use use symbols/footprints from > gedasymbols But it isn't hard or tedious. > won't discourage people who would use them blindly from > doing so. Easier access to such a database would make it easier to > find existing symbols and pull them in for customization for those > that know how to use the tool set. Just because it may make it easier > for people to shoot themselves in the foot is no reason not to have > it. It's important for a tool to avoid providing an illusion of safety. John Doty Noqsi Aerospace, Ltd. http://www.noqsi.com/ j...@noqsi.com _______________________________________________ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
