Re: gEDA-user: Hi.... first post

[Stuart Brorson <sdb@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, 13 Mar 2007, Steve Meier wrote:

> geda and pcb don't care if the pinnumbers are numbers or strings. As
> long as they are the same.

Yeah, but since there are multiple symbols for many devices, and
multiple footprints for a single symbol, it's best for us to
standardize on a common pinnumbering nomenclature.  For example, we
have several NPN transistors in the symbol libraries, and some use
numbers and some use alpha chars for teh pinnumber attribute.  We also
have *lots* of footprints which can potentially be used for a
transistor (TO-3, TO-92, SOT-23, etc).  I think it best to at least
standardize on usign numbers to assign the pins.

Of course, this quickly leads to the usual discussion about:

1.  The symbol and footprint libs are a mess.  Yes, we know.  We're
waiting for a volunteer to step up and rationalize things.  In the
meantime, most people maintain their own symbol and footprint libs.

2.  Yes, lots of people call for heavy symbols, in which each symbol
calls out a specific footprint, and there's no discrepancy between
pinnumber on the symbol and on the footprint.  However, the developers
are not at all interested in becoming component librarians, so it's
unlikely to ever happen.  People who want heavy symbols should make
their own, or do some horse-trading on geda-user or look at
gedasymbols.org.

Alternately, there does exist an opportunity for somebody to sell CDs
full of heavy symbols in which each symbol calls out a specific
footprint, and all symbols/footprints have been checked/vetted!  You
know who I mean....  ;-)

> > From a preference point of view I like the pin numbers to match the
> component data sheet.

Total agreement.

Stuart


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