[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]

Re: gEDA-user: Solving the light/heavy symbol problem

On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 12:01:59PM -0400, DJ Delorie wrote:
> My own proposal (posted in the past) is here:
>    http://www.delorie.com/pcb/component-dbs.html

I like this idea a lot. Allowing pcb and gschem to use different
(multiple) databases with different backends gives us a lot of
freedom. It would let us ship, say, a sqlite database with a bunch
of defaults (after bickering endlessly about what such defaults
might be), while shops or even gedasymbols.org might have a real
SQL db so that everyone has the same footprint data.

It would also greatly simplify packaging and versioning, since
these database backends can be changed by sql scripts, can store
metadata, etc.
> It moves the problem out of gschem and into the netlister, which gives
> PCB the opportunity to be part of the process as well (the netlist can
> accept input from both gschem and pcb), but adds the requirement for
> back-annotation for those who prefer the master schematics to have
> that info in them.  It is also an optional step in the flow, so it
> doesn't block other solutions (like a heavy-only library).

Andrew Poelstra
Email: asp11 at sfu.ca OR apoelstra at wpsoftware.net
Web:   http://www.wpsoftware.net/andrew/

geda-user mailing list