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

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

> It is not just "us". it is the traditional way to look at an
> electronics project. Schematic, layout and BOM  contain all the 
> information needed to reproduce.

We currently derive the BOM from other sources (well, from the
schematics).  PCB can derive its own BOM as well.

The metadata idea would flip this, and have the BOM be an *input* to
the process, not an *output*.

> This is one of the major blunders of eagle. There is no decent way 
> to reunite layout and schematic after you changed one without 
> the other. I have seen more than one project break this way.

Yeah, that was a tough problem to solve, until I realized (well,
considered :) that the layout-specific data does NOT need to be
"reunited" with the schematics.  The key problem is, if you have
conflicting information in two places, which is correct?  My though
was: if it's layout-specific data, the copy in the layout is correct.
Perhaps we need to keep track of whether the data in the layout and
schematic originated in that file, or is the result of user changes
elsewhere being imported.

But any solution depends on (1) allowing data to originate from
multiple places, and (2) sane rules for which "wins".

geda-user mailing list