Re: gEDA-user: good idea - bad idea ?

[DJ Delorie <dj@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

> unless gsch2pcb and pcb really get the prioritization right

That's what needs to happen.

> You have a great point about the necessity to go through each and
> every footprint in everyone's library and "vetting" them for a
> multiple of usability metrics.  That's a tall order.

Yes, it is.  We have to do it anyway, or we end up doing it
individually for each board we make.  Or we end up making bad boards.

> The main problem is that I think right now a lot of people prefer
> using the newlibs and many of those are "better" than the same-named
> M4.

I disagree.  The ~geda set is very good, for example.

> I think short of some kind of painful vetting process, there has to
> be some way to let the user continue (I use that word sparingly
> since the only way to force non-M4's seems to be to move/rename
> them) to segregate M4's from newlibs.

You assume that the newlib footprints are better than the M4
footprints *only because they're newlib*.  This is untrue.  It sounds
like you're prejudiced against M4 footprints, when you should be
critical of all footprints equally.


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