[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]
Re: gEDA-user: paid help?
I would never trust pre-made symbols for any project, it takes very
little effort to make your own, and some projects would call for
something different that wasnt exactly in default pads anyway, such as
smaller width 0402 pads for a densely placed board etc.
But stuff like qfn/bga/etc, it better be made from datasheet directly
and re-measured twice or else its gonna screw something up.
On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 1:36 PM, Dave N6NZ <n6nz@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Apr 6, 2010, at 4:21 PM, Levente Kovacs wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 6 Apr 2010 09:41:37 -0700
>> Anthony Shanks <yamazakir2-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>>> In my opinion it's worth spending an hour going over the footprint
>>> file format and just making your footprints in an ASCII editor. Once
>>> you know the file format it's very fast (< 10 min per footprint on
>>> average) and you get the exact dimensions you need specified by the
>>> datasheet. Making footprints with this method in my opinion is easier
>>> and faster than most closed source tools I have used.
>>>
>>> With that said, I still think pcb has many shortcomings, but
>>> footprints aren't one of them.
>>
>> Is there any non-interactive footprint editor around? Like a perl script which
>> can set mask and clearence. It would be nice for example run it through your
>> library, and it would set the mask offset to x.
>
> Yes, well, some of DJ's footprint generators are on the geda symbols website as interactive web pages. And I have written a couple of quick generator programs that I've yet to make public -- first excuse being that until I fabbed some boards with the footprints I didn't think that wise, (excuse no longer applicable), second excuse being that they aren't really in a form where I'm not embarrassed to have other people read my code :( I've just never cleaned them up.
>
> Of course, you are asking about something different it seems, not a generator, but a parametric tweaker "all masks shall now have offset X" -- which is suppose could be handy, but I just regenerate the footprint with different parameters.
>
> -dave
>
>>
>> It would also be nice to do this on a footprint in *.pcb file.
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> Levente
>>
>> P.S.: If no one have such thing... I warm up my editor to write it. :-)
>>
>>> On Tue, Apr 6, 2010 at 9:35 AM, John Doty
>>> <jpd-eOgpOkEIG7IAvxtiuMwx3w@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Apr 6, 2010, at 9:25 AM, DJ Delorie wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> I am just getting started and may say things that sound stupid.
>>>>>
>>>>> Even something you think sounds stupid gives us some insight into
>>>>> how new users perceive our software :-)
>>>>
>>>> One of the problems here is that the gschem GUI channels new users
>>>> in a dysfunctional direction. Referencing library symbols is more
>>>> often than not the wrong way to go. Embedding, sometimes given as
>>>> an alternative, scales poorly, so it's only applicable to the
>>>> smallest projects.
>>>>
>>>> A better way is to import every symbol you're using into your
>>>> *project* (not just the schematic page you happen to be working
>>>> on). One you have a project-local copy, the needed customizations
>>>> are easy through Hierarchy->Down Symbol.
>>>>
>>>> I keep a shell window open for this purpose. Use gschem to browse
>>>> for a symbol similar to what I need, go to shell window and copy to
>>>> project, hit the #$@% refresh button on the symbol browser, then
>>>> pick it up from the project symbol directory. This isn't at all
>>>> time consuming, and in the end saves a *lot* of time, but it sure
>>>> isn't obvious to the beginner.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> I guess this leaves me with a question... Is geda meant for the
>>>>>> non-lazy high end user that roll's his/her own footprints?
>>>>>
>>>>> It's a mix of both. We *do* have libraries of symbols and
>>>>> footprints for many of the commonly needed parts. People *still*
>>>>> often have to "roll their own" because we just don't have *every*
>>>>> part in our library.
>>>>
>>>> Not just that: the symbols in the library are inevitably wrong in
>>>> some way in light of the needs of a particular project flow.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, we'd like our library to be more complete, but we've been
>>>>> discussing this problem for YEARS and have yet to come up with a
>>>>> workable solution.
>>>>>
>>>>>> If so then if I paid for a few more then it would not really help
>>>>>> as this is not the intended direction.
>>>>>
>>>>> Hmmm... no, that's not right. Intent has nothing to do with it,
>>>>> it's just not practical for us to have every part in our libraries.
>>>>
>>>> Every part in every manufacturer's variant for every customer's
>>>> documentation requirements using every design flow and every
>>>> manufacturing flow...
>>>>
>>>> A trillion symbols would not be sufficient.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> If the project does need more footprints then would it not be good
>>>>>> to come up with a viable solution to create them?
>>>>>
>>>>> Sure. Go ahead :-)
>>>>>
>>>>>> For instance could someone sell a support package, i.e includes 50
>>>>>> footprints for X amount of money. These footprints would then
>>>>>> become open source and available to all, free as in beer. Would
>>>>>> this approach not bring more people to the project? or would it
>>>>>> bring the wrong kind of people?
>>>>>
>>>>> I think this would be a great idea, if (1) you could find people
>>>>> willing to do that, (2) you could find people willing to pay for
>>>>> it, and (3) they could agree on a price.
>>>>>
>>>>> But this has nothing to do with *our* desires, it's a free market -
>>>>> all it needs is two people willing to deal. We already have
>>>>> gedasymbols.org where people can put freely usable symbols and
>>>>> footprints, I don't think anyone would have a problem with someone
>>>>> promoting their own services and rates on their gedasymbols page.
>>>>>
>>>>> Perhaps what we need is a bounty system? Someone posts an URL for
>>>>> a part's spec sheet and how much they're willing to pay.
>>>>> Contenders post screenshots of the symbols and footprints they
>>>>> come up with, and one is chosen to get the bounty and submit their
>>>>> data files to the community.
>>>>
>>>> The single most important thing is to fix gschem so that it doesn't
>>>> lead users into the unproductive trap of referencing unmodified
>>>> library symbols in designs. Then maybe we can escape from the
>>>> delusion that what's primarily needed is a bigger library.
>>>>
>>>> Don't get me wrong: I think publishing symbols is great.
>>>> gedasymbols.org is a great resource, and indeed I have thrown a
>>>> bunch of symbols into the pot there over the last few days.
>>>> Starting with a symbol that's as close to what you need as possible
>>>> is always best. But publishing symbols cannot solve the fundamental
>>>> problem: "as close as possible" rarely means "exactly".
>>>>
>>>> John Doty Noqsi Aerospace, Ltd.
>>>> http://www.noqsi.com/
>>>> jpd-eOgpOkEIG7IAvxtiuMwx3w@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> geda-user mailing list
>>>> geda-user-3OLirty5fqqAvZLjymCQLg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>> http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> geda-user mailing list
>>> geda-user-3OLirty5fqqAvZLjymCQLg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Levente Kovacs
>> http://logonex.eu
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> geda-user mailing list
>> geda-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> geda-user mailing list
> geda-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
>
_______________________________________________
geda-user mailing list
geda-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user