Re: gEDA-user: More robust support of multi-part symbols.

[John Luciani <jluciani@xxxxxxxxx>]

   On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 2:08 PM, Bill Gatliff <[1]bgat@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
   wrote:

   John Luciani wrote:
   >    aggregates the attributes manufacturer and
   manufacturer_part_number,
   >

     Are those two attributes a common convention?  I've been using
     manufacturer= and manufacturer_partnumber=.  I've also been doing
     vendor_partnumber_digikey= and vendor_partnumber_mouser=, but I'm
     not so
     sure those are useful enough to keep doing so.

   Putting vendor information into the schematic is not a good idea.
   I use Postgres tables for that mapping. You could get the relations
   using text files and hashes.
   Ideally you would not put manufacturer information in the schematic
   either.
   You would have a master parts list with your own part number that does
   a one-to-many map to multiple vendors. Since that database is a bit
   of work to setup and maintain I use manufacturer and
   manufacturer_part_number.
   Building a real master parts list is on my to-do list.
   (* jcl *)

   --
   You can't create open hardware with closed EDA tools.
   [2]http://www.luciani.org

References

   1. mailto:bgat@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
   2. http://www.luciani.org/


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