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

Re: gEDA-user: Blind and buried vias?

>    I'm not sure why it's apparently irrelevant that the accepted predominant
>    workflow is from gschem to pcb

So what? What are all those other back ends for? Aren't they important?

> or that pcb is a member project of the
>    geda project. If member projects and affiliated projects aren't
>    considered part of gEDA then I'm curious as to what you define  
> as gEDA
>    and what topics you define as appropriate for this list.

The issue isn't what topics are appropriate. The issue is keeping the  
interfaces clean and flexible. To do that, you have to remember what  
the interfaces are.

   What other backends? Are you referring to netlister and others? Most
   of them exist to modify schematic files to get it ready for a pcb.
   Otherwise I guess you could mean spice or other simulators. Either
   way, other backends are not particularly relevant to the discussion.
   The discussion was about
   why others consider pcb to be a part of gEDA.
   To keep the interfaces clean and flexible you have to remember what
   the interfaces are? I have no idea what you are trying to say.
   The OP said:


> What's the current and planned state of support for blind and/or  
> buried
> vias in the gEDA system?
That's like asking "what's the state of support for driving Phillips  
head screws with a handsaw?".

Another patronising analogy. I think last time you used a chainsaw. 
Pretty much everyone else on this list includes pcb in the geda name, those who
 don't know that others do. It's obvious from
context what the question meant regardless of what your stance is on gEDA termi
nology. I think that all things considered, your
response was deliberately antagonistic.

   >

>    "Currently, the gEDA project offers a mature suite of free softwareapplica
tions for electronics design, including schematic capture,
>    attribute management, bill of materials (BOM) generation,  
> netlisting
>    into over 20 netlist formats, analog and digital simulation, and
>    printed circuit board (PCB) layout."

I don't know who wrote that. gEDA and PCB are separate, independently  
developed projects. They have different source trees and conventions.  
They were not originally designed for each other. That they play well  
together is a testimony to the power of clean interface design. Let's  
not forget that, because if we do we will lose that power.

   It comes from the gEDA front page [1]http://www.gpleda.org/
   That they play well is a testament to the fact that the netlister was
   written specifically for use with pcb and that the pcb project is
   affiliated with the gEDA project.
   [2]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GEDA#History
   >From the same wiki article:
   Loosely speaking, the term "gEDA Suite" refers to all [3]free software
   projects and applications that have voluntarily associated themselves
   with the gEDA Project via the geda-dev/geda-user mailing lists. These
   include:
     * gEDA/gaf - gschem and friends (the original project)
     * PCB - PCB layout program   <------ take note of this one
     * Gerbv - [4]Gerber file viewer
     * ngspice - a port of Berkeley [5]SPICE
     * GnuCap - A modern [6]electronic circuit simulation program
     * gspiceui - A [7]GUI front end for ngspice/GnuCap
     * gwave - An analog [8]waveform viewer
     * Icarus Verilog - A [9]Verilog simulator
     * GTKWave - A digital [10]waveform viewer
     * wcalc - [11]Transmission line and electromagnetic structure
       analysis

   Within the gEDA Suite, gEDA/gaf ("gaf" stands for "gschem and
   friends") is the smaller subset of tools grouped together under the
   gEDA name and maintained directly by the gEDA project's founders.
   GEDA/gaf includes:
     * gschem - A [12]schematic capture program
     * gnetlist - A [13]netlist generation program
     * gsymcheck - A syntax checker for schematic symbols
     * gattrib - A [14]spreadsheet program for editing symbol attributes
       on a schematic.
     * libgeda - Libraries for gschem, gnetlist, and gsymcheck
     * gsch2pcb - Forward annotation from schematic to layout using pcb
     * Assorted utility programs

   > Anyone who brings up a point about how

>    geda/gaf/pcb could be more useful, more user friendly etc

More useful and friendly to *what kind* of user? The kind that would
prefer spending an hour mousing around to solve a problem once, or 15
minutes writing a script to solve it for all time?

   This is the line of argument I really have an issue with. I mean
   making it easier to use by someone who doesn't want to command line
   everything. For someone who likes to be able to use the program
   instead of spending all their time researching non-existent
   documentation. For someone who would like to have their program to
   have functions that are accessible, rather than have commands hidden
   away. You seem to assume that all users of gEDA are capable or want to
   write a script to solve a problem and that it takes an hour to find
   anything through a GUI interface. I can assure you that anyone wanting
   to write scripts for the first time will spend days searching for
   documentation.
   Why does your concept of scripted flexibility and my thoughts on GUI
   ease-of-use have to be mutually exclusive? Gui accesible function
   could still be accessed through scripts if required.
   I disagree. The abuse of terminology here is dangerous, because it

encourages the delusion that gEDA and pcb would be better if they
were more integrated. Integrated tools may be easier to use in some
sense, but they don't have gEDA's productivity potential.


Altium announced that having separated modules for schematic capture, layout an
d simulation was the biggest problem in their program.
It stands in the way of simple forward and back annotation for example.

I'm really at a loss to understand where your concept of gEDA's superior produc
tivity potential comes from. Other than saying it's better
often, you don't say too much on the topic.

References

   1. http://www.gpleda.org/
   2. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GEDA#History
   3. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software
   4. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerber_file
   5. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SPICE
   6. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_circuit_simulation
   7. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GUI
   8. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waveform_viewer
   9. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Verilog
  10. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waveform_viewer
  11. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transmission_line
  12. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schematic_capture
  13. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Netlist
  14. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spreadsheet


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