[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
   > right, so how can we? A narrowly targeted, inflexible tool like Eagle
   > 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
   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

   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