Re: gEDA-dev: Pinning down libgeda

[Peter Clifton <pcjc2-at-NOSPAMcam_dot_ac_dot_uk>]

On Thu, 2007-03-01 at 07:28 -0500, Ales Hvezda wrote:
> Hi PeterB,
> 
> > That does seem like a good idea.  I imagine that the definite release would go 
> > into a maintenance cycle as the stable version while the internals get 
> > butchered during the redesign?
> 
> Yes, the definite release would go into extended maintenance mode while
> the development version gets modified.  
> 
> However, based on what I have been reading over the past few days, all
> of the proposed and/or in progress changes made by various people seem
> quite radical, so I encourage those people who want to make really radical
> changes to fork and rename their implementation as it will be difficult
> to integrate the huge architectural changes into the existing code base.

I'd not like to see any forking of libgeda / gschem / gaf. The most
radical I'd envisage would be to have two APIs co-exist, and gently port
from one to the other. (Even if it required a temporary wrapper layer
between the twp APIs during the process).

As with the glist-dev and no-screen changes, the code changes should be 
undetectable from the user's perspective.

-- 
Peter Clifton

Electrical Engineering Division,
Engineering Department,
University of Cambridge,
9, JJ Thomson Avenue,
Cambridge
CB3 0FA

Tel: +44 (0)7729 980173 - (No signal in the lab!)



_______________________________________________
geda-dev mailing list
geda-dev@moria.seul.org
http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-dev