Re: gEDA-user: Reinventing the wheel

[Stephen Ecob <silicon.on.inspiration@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Sat, May 21, 2011 at 1:26 AM, Kai-Martin Knaak
<knaak@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Colin D Bennett wrote:
>
>> Not to get into the whole light/heavy symbol debate
>
> Maybe, it is time to look at this issue again. When I first read geda
> documentation, there were already references that this had been discussed
> ad nauseam. As a result, the default lib was the way it was and is. This
> is six year back now. Since then, this topic has not been raised on the
> mailing list. But there are
>
> Except for some bug fixes, the default lib stayed the same for all the
> years. No symbols were added, none was removed, nothing was restructured.
>
> If the default lib is to be changed now, then there should be some kind
> of new consensus on the heavy/light issue. Else, the effort might end in
> religious  war and, or frustration.

There will always be a place for both heavy and light.  People's work
flows vary too much to limit gEDA to just one.

One thing worth thinking about is closer integration of gschem and pcb
with gedasymbols.org.
If our programs obtained symbols directly from there it would get
people out of the mind-set that there is just one library of symbols.
The reality is that our community provides a bazaar of different
symbols and philosophies of symbol creation.

It would be great if we also had an easier way to contribute symbols
back (perhaps with just a mouse click or two).


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