No one on this list seems to want to touch this issue (Or my last email...). How strange. Here we are on a list dedicated to EDA and nobody wants to discuss elements/footprints. I assume that this somehow revolves around the gpl'ing of elements/footprints and the ramifications of using them in commercial designs. If this is the case, why doesn't someone say so? If this is not the way it is, someone should say so. FWIW, we have already decided to create all of our own footprints and elements from scratch because of the wording of the gpl license. In my mind, this is serious issue that needs to be addressed by this community in order to further the spread of usage of the gEDA tools in real work/projects. Regards Marvin > On Wednesday 26 January 2005 5:48 am, Bob Paddock wrote: > On Tuesday 25 January 2005 10:13 pm, Matt Ettus wrote: > > We should make this process more scalable. It should take almost no > > effort for someone to contribute all the footprints which they have > > made to some centralized repository, and simply mark them as > > "unvetted". > > David Grant suggested setting up a Wiki for footprint contributions. > I have seen Wiki being used on other SourceForge projects such > as mingw. Could one be set up as part of the pcb.sf.net project? > Or someone else have a server they could setup a footprint Wiki? > > Is there some reason that footprints can not be submitted as > patches?
Attachment:
pgpmIbr8RIM4x.pgp
Description: PGP signature