[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]
Re: gEDA-user: Reinventing the wheel
> > Examples
> > are the next to unusable default library of geda
>
> As has been discussed many times, this cannot be fixed, since there
is no
> narrow, common use case for gEDA. Even the big $$ tools can't get
this
> right, so how can we? A narrowly targeted, inflexible tool like Eagle
can
> maybe, kind of, but that's not gEDA.
Actually I think gEDA is not too bad for components/symbols really.
What the default library lacks, gedsymbols often has. With a little bit
more promotion of gedasymbols I think people wouldn't have such an
issue.
In terms of the usability of the default symbols - I just treat them as
a starting point. It is unlikely anyone will have done a symbol exactly
to my preference, and even if they have I like to add a whole bunch of
extra attributes. The default library and gedasymbols remove a lot of
the heavy lifting.
A full symbol/footprint library is something that I expect to build for
myself - I am not going to be happy unless I have closely checked each
symbol. I am very thankful for being able to base my work from what
others have done - but I am not planning on being in the position of
having a dead pcb because I didn't check a 3rd party footprint
properly.
As far as the guile/scheme gnetlist backend is concerned... I did
manage to modify one of the BOM backends to pull some extra attributes
I add to my symbols. My first look at guile/scheme hurt my head - too
many brackets. But after the initial shock it wasn't too bad.
_______________________________________________
geda-user mailing list
geda-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user