Re: gEDA-user: geda-user Digest, Vol 32, Issue 92

[Brendan Howell <brendan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, 2009-01-22 at 11:26 -0500, geda-user-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
wrote:

> > I am one of the developers of Fritzing, a simple FLOSS EDA made for
> less
> > technical (non-engineer) users.  Our project is young but we have
> been
> > posting frequent releases since November.
> 
> Yeah, we're aware of the project.  I pestered you guys about a year
> ago to get invovled with gEDA.  Welcome, and congratulations on
> getting Fritzing off the ground!
> 

There was an initial version of Fritzing made with Java/Eclipse that
ended up being more of a proof-of-concept.  We threw out most of the
code and started over this summer with Qt/C++ and we are much much
happier and making much better progress.

> > Introductions aside, I was hoping to start a dialogue between our
> > groups.  We see our project as fitting into the EDA world in a
> different
> > space from gEDA.  Most of our target audience have limited
> experience
> > with electronics and are interested in realizing small,
> low-complexity
> > prototypes.  However, as our software is limited (intentionally) in
> > scope, some users may reach a stage where they need the more
> advanced
> > EDA features of a package like gEDA.
> 
> Yeah, the protoboard paradigm for doing a design is very different
> from the traditional PCB design flow (which is one thing gEDA tries to
> do).  It's an interesting approach for electronics newbies....
> Reading your bulletin board, I see many people who like the interface
> a lot.  Getting a user interface to be natural and intuitive is very
> difficult!  (Particularly in an open-source project....)

Yeah it is tough.  We are supported by the Interaction Design department
at the FH-Potsdam so usability is a major focus for us.

> One thing.....   Fritzing's close tie-in with Eagle is, ummmmm, out of
> tune for an open-source/open-hardware project IMO.  But that's not my
> decision to  make, and we're happy to see you guys are contacting us
> (a real open-source EDA project).

I agree with you.  Since our summer restart, we have ditched all the
dependencies on Eagle and now have our own simple but functional PCB
view.  We may eventually support an export to Eagle option but our core
goal is a fully FLOSS production process.

> 
> > Right now, I'm working on a gEDA-PCB footprint import component that
> > converts gEDA footprint files to our internal SVG based files.  In
> the
> > long term we would be interested in supporting some sort of export
> path
> > so that users can export Fritzing projects and continue working on
> them
> > in gEDA.
> 
> Very cool!  Being able to convert gEDA/PCB footprints <-> Fritzing
> footprints (both ways) would be very nice.  A big win would be that
> one could use any SVG drawing program to create the footprints, and
> then convert to a gEDA/PCB .fp file.
> 
> The question here is:  What is the structure of a Fritzing footprint?
> That is, a footprint assumes a certain layer structure.  For example,
> a through-hole footprint assumes you have top silk, top
> mask, paste and metal, some clearance structure for inner layers, and
> then bottom silk, mask, paste, and metal.  Also, one might also want
> to provide a keepout layer and also other layers which I have
> probably 
> forgotten.
> 
> So...  Is the footprint structure documented anywhere?  (I admit I
> haven't looked.)

Docs... heh.  Who has time for docs?  Actually, I should work on that.
If you guys are interested, then I will try to put something on our web
site explaining the SVG formatting.  Basically, all the paths for each
layer are stuck in a group which is tagged with the id for that layer.
At the moment we only support single sided boards but we will need to
add the bits on the back of the board at some point as well. 

best,
-Brendan



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