X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Message-ID: <20121116213601.13718.qmail@stuge.se>
Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2012 22:36:01 +0100
From: Peter Stuge <peter AT stuge DOT se>
To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: [geda-user] Thoughts on gschem UI
Mail-Followup-To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
References: <50A688B8 DOT 4090809 AT neurotica DOT com> <CC923058-B962-45B5-973D-EA03906430B9 AT noqsi DOT com> <50A6A265 DOT 6050300 AT neurotica DOT com> <4E8E6F31-EF8D-4540-BA86-7935C1C3E6D8 AT noqsi DOT com> <50A6A95C DOT 5030903 AT neurotica DOT com> <355DEF4F-51BB-44A8-A5F4-D8564E7E7885 AT noqsi DOT com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <355DEF4F-51BB-44A8-A5F4-D8564E7E7885@noqsi.com>
Reply-To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk

John Doty wrote:
> the gschem UI is what it is, very old fashioned, and trying to
> improve it by adding "features" has made it harder to use, not
> easier. 21st century UI's are fundamentally very different. I
> would support an effort to make a modern gschem.

I'd love to hear more about this!

What are your biggest issues with gschem UI?

And how would they not be issues with a modern UI?

I'm a very long time pcb user and I have no issues with it besides
scheme being completely foreign. I'm a much shorter time gschem user,
but I don't really have issues with it either - so I'm interested to
learn how they work (or don't!) for others; maybe things are
different because of different tasks, or because we understand the
programs differently. In any case I'd love to hear more details. :)


//Peter