[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]

Re: gEDA-user: Foss-pcb Proposed plan from CERN



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Am 24.08.2011 22:46, schrieb John Hudak:
>    ummm, I think citing and expounding on the philosophical differences of
>    one approach (integrated) versus another (multiple tool kits) is a nice
>    amorphous description and somewhat akin to mental masturbation.  
I somehow agree, but the flexibility to insert other (maybe hand-written
own) tools into the entire design flow is essential.

>    The philosophy of gEDA has already been established.  What is more
>    important is that the tool suite *flawlessly* supports a small subset
>    of generally accepted design-fabrication paradigms, eg workflow from
>    schematic to completed & populated board, and a subset of potential
>    offshoot efforts such as circuit simulation, head modeling,symbol
>    creation and package creation and management, etc.
I disagree with this point: You treat circuit simulation as an offshoot,
that's pretty dangerous: If board costs are in the range of 100$ you're
right, but if the board cosst increases to 10k$ it's very dangerous to
give simulation a low priority.

>    My premise is that if you put 100 design engineers in a room who have
>    done circuit design to board fab and ask them to produce a scenario of
>    their work flow, at least 40% of them would have a common scenario.
That's the wrong audience for your question:
Ask architects what it takes to put their ideas into a shippable product
instead of asking the frogs about drying the swamp :-) . You
overestimate one part of the entire design flow.

- From my point of view the major thing is to have one design source (even
with a multitude of attributes e.g. net_group = g1, net_length(g1) = xxx
mm, tolerance(g1) = 1 mm, ...etc) and drive simulation and board layout
from this single source. That also requires feedback of electrical
properties of the board wires back into the design source (and by this
into the simulation model).

I admit, as a hobbyist I'm happy with the current gschem->pcb flow as of
today but for upcoming RF designs I'd like to have an easy generation of
netlists including electrical parameters


... deleted the rest ...
- -- 

Mit freundlichen Gruessen

Dietmar Schmunkamp
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.16 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with SUSE - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAk5W6dQACgkQn22l+QvEah0UowCeM7lvV+gSkRZ1vkvs9Psv57S0
F4sAn0fBPALS76Wob52Cy13A7e5Nhv4X
=SgkS
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


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