gEDA-dev: gnetlist as one way path?

[Steve Meier]

I think this falls into do you think I care... the basis is a decent
basis but isn't capable of doing what I need. If i never converge but
build the tools I need. So be it.

As I tell my kids... you arn't punishing me.

Steve Meier

Ales Hvezda wrote:
>> Well, I was shooting for converging in libeda version 3.
>>     
>
> 	Okay, but keep in mind that I will _not_ accept any huge changeset
> (read: a rewrite or drastic/fundamental data structure changes) into
> gEDA/gaf unless there is consensus on the design and has been vetted by
> the maintainers of the code going forward.
>
> 	The alternative is baby change integration with the existing
> code base.  That has worked fairly well in the past and continues to
> work well today.
>
> 	I'm not trying to be difficult here, but I think it is pretty
> unreasonable to expect me (or anybody else) to volunteer maintain code
> without going through the standard contribution process (small controlled
> patch sets with validation/test).  Thanks,
>
> 					-Ales
>
> PS. Yes, another option is always on the table: "fork the code base and
> simply bypass this stubborn jerk". :)  All I ask is that you don't call
> the fork gschem/libgeda/gaf as that code base will continue to exist
> and be used.
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> geda-dev mailing list
> geda-dev at moria.seul.org
> http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-dev
>
>