Re: gEDA-user: DB9 -> DE9

[Karel Kulhavy <clock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Sat, Feb 25, 2006 at 11:47:56AM -0500, Charles Lepple wrote:
> On 2/25/06, Karel Kulhavy <clock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > I suggest the gschem symbols DB-1.sym and DB-2.sym to be renamed to
> > DE-1.sym and DE-2.sym because according to Wikipedia it's the correct
> > designation. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DB25
> 
> Regardless of which designation is correct, gEDA convention seems to
> prefer creating another new symbol with a higher version number
> (DE-3), rather than editing an older symbol-- that is, unless the
> older symbol is truly broken. More people will recognize DB-9 over
> DE-9 when looking for parts. If you really want to retire DB-1.sym and
> DB-2.sym, do you have a suggestion for an upgrade path? Symbolic
> links, maybe? A "deprecated symbol" warning message?

Symlinks, if symlink not possible then copy. Plus implement symbol
comments and add deprecated into symbol comment.

CL<
> 
> (I'm trying not to get hung up on the pedantry of the DB-9 vs DE-9
> debate, but it's really difficult...)
> 
> --
> - Charles Lepple