Re: gEDA-user: gEDA/gaf capabilities

[eswint@xxxxxx]

Thanks for the replies.  I'm sure that geda/gaf will satisfy my needs in terms
of coming up with new designs - I'm looking at making small circuit boards for
1-2 kW motor drive applications - nothing in RF or high speed - and I try to
keep them to 2 layers so that I can make cheap protos.  That being said, the
feature comparison checklist is a nice marketing tool.

I do have one specific question on capability - I have an existing designs
(schematics + layout) in PCAD and PADs formats.  Is there a method which will
allow me to preserve some of this work?

Quoting Duncan Drennan <duncan.drennan@xxxxxxxxx>:

> I was in a similar position a couple of month back, wondering whether
> geda/gaf was a capable tool and whether committing to it would be a
> good idea. I have only really worked with the schematic editor
> (gschem) and the netlister (I use a subcontractor to do layout which
> is done in PCAD).
>
> After having worked with gschem and parts of geda for a while, I am
> astounded at how powerful and excellent the tools are, as well as how
> good the documentation and support is (the support on this list is
> amazing and patient).
>
> There is a feature of geda that people underestimate the value of,
> mainly because it is something that they have never been exposed to.
> Randall hinted at it...
>
> > I end up making a lot of footprints
> > myself, but again I have assembled a set of tools that automate that
> > to a large extent, so it is not really a big deal.
>
> Open file formats and scriptable programs. Just take some time to
> think about what that means. The implications are huge.
>
> All those repetitive tasks that you do can be automated. Creation of
> components and footprints can be automated. All the tedious tasks that
> integrated and closed packages force on us can be done away with.
>
> Yes, it will take some time to become familiar with the package (as
> with any other package) and yes there are limitations (again, as with
> any other package). But think about the huge time savings (i.e. money
> saving/producing) you can gain from the openness of geda.
>
> Here is an example to think about:
>
> Let's say I have a stock database. Each item has a unique stock code.
> Engineers don't care about the stock codes, but they do care about the
> component values. The person that orders stock doesn't care about the
> values, just the stock code. Lets say an 0603 100k 1% 100ppm resistor
> had the stock code R00001. So the engineer goes along and puts down a
> resistor in a schematic with a footprint 0603 and value 100k (in this
> case he doesn't care too much about the other details).
>
> Once he is done with the design the engineer knows he needs to give
> the bom to the person who orders stock and they just want to be able
> to order based on the stock codes. So the engineer runs a script which
> automatically queries the database and generates a BOM based on the
> stock codes. The script can also automatically insert the rest of the
> info and the stock code into the schematic. Obviously this can be far
> more complicated, but you get the idea.
>
> Those are my thoughts. gEDA fulfils the current requirements of my
> business and works well. I'm happy.

>




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