Re: gEDA-user: footprints

[Karel Kulhavy <clock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Sun, Mar 05, 2006 at 01:53:18PM -0500, Dan McMahill wrote:
> Karel Kulhavy wrote:
> >On Mon, Feb 27, 2006 at 12:11:22AM +0000, Marc Price wrote:
> >
> >>Ive tried multiple times now using Grep to find the footprint for a 
> >>resistor i add it and it doesnt work! every time i try it either uses 
> >>the wrong footprint or says error, surely a footprint selector of some 
> >>sort needs to be added to either gattrib or gschem in order to simplify 
> >>this process.
> >>
> >>Sorry i got to say this i like the look and feel of gEDA but no common 
> >>sense has gone into making these programs work together.
> >
> >
> >You could fix this by saving all m4 footprints as newlib and starting
> >your new fork of PCB project with this. It should not be too much work,
> >especially if automated, and increase the comfort tremendously. I
> >estimate it's unlikely the developers will do it because this theme will
> >trigger an avalanche of discussions and cause them to be paralyzed by
> >analysis paralysis.
> 
> This is an example of where you seem to go out of your way to be rude.
> 
> For your information, this has actually been implemented and just needs 
> some testing.  You might also have noted that it has been mentioned on 
> this list that such a thing was under way.
> 
> I'll note that on the topic of footprints and a few other items, nothing 
> has been done not because of "analysis paralysis" but because we do this 
> in our free time which is limited and because I've seen the results of 
> jumping in with coding and putting a lot of effort when there was a poor 
> or no up front design.
> 
> Perhaps you think no design is required for these systems?
> 
> You could help the situation if you would actually take up some these 
> issues and actually contribute some work to get them done rather than 
> spending your time spewing insults.

I sent a patch to fix "Karel Kulhavy,,," in the output - will this be
incorporated or not?

CL<