Must it be round?
___
geda-user mailing list
geda-user@moria.seul.org
http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Kai-Martin Knaak k...@lilalaser.de writes:
Stephan Boettcher wrote:
My colleagues use eagle. I review their gerbers with gerbv. They
envy my hierachical schematics and scripting fu,
Funny. I got the impression, the scripting abilities of
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
On Sat, May 21, 2011 at 1:26 AM, Kai-Martin Knaak
kn...@iqo.uni-hannover.de 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
It would be great if we also had an easier way to contribute symbols
back (perhaps with just a mouse click or two).
The only limit I put on gedasymbols is accountability. I want to make
sure that if a symbol or footprint is up there, you know who's
responsible for it. Solutions which meet
Kai-Martin Knaak k...@lilalaser.de writes:
Stephan Boettcher wrote:
Judging the
code by lack of comments without knowledge of the language is too.
I referred to the lack of documentation, rather than lack of comments.
The particular case I had in mind, is the interaction of gnetlist's
C
Kai-Martin Knaak k...@lilalaser.de writes:
Stephan Boettcher wrote:
Why is there so much discussion here about the needs of potential new
users, instead of the needs of current, loving, existing users? Let's
make the tools perfect for us (that includes discoverability and
documentation
Geoff Swan shinobi.j...@gmail.com writes:
Examples
are the next to unusable default library of geda
As has been discussed many times, this cannot be fixed, since there is no
narrow, common use case for gEDA.
It can be fixed, ...
Actually I think gEDA is not too bad for
On May 19, 2011, at 4:26 AM, Stephan Boettcher wrote:
I referred to the lack of documentation, rather than lack of comments.
The particular case I had in mind, is the interaction of gnetlist's
C front-end with the scheme back-ends. There seems to be no documentation
whatsoever, what data
John Doty j...@noqsi.com writes:
So, is it really that bad?
In the end, when you really need to look something up, giyf, it is all
there. But terribly disorganised. For most things that may need
looking up I am completely unaware that they even exist.
As I said eleswhere, the first thing I
Stephan Boettcher wrote:
The way to promote gedasymbols and to fix the default library is to
remove the default library, except for a small set of very generic
symbols.
ack.
This set of symbols should provide the ability to start working as is
and generally be examples for complete working
Vanessa Ezekowitz wrote:
KMK didn't say what he means by unusable,
Most immediately: The symbols in the default lib do not contain footprint
attributes. Not even an empty ones. This prevents them to just-work for
the most common work-flow of geda: gschem - gnetlist - pcb - gerbv
The
On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 04:25:40AM +0200, Kai-Martin Knaak wrote:
Stefan Salewski wrote:
While gEDA/PCB has some serious
users and a large list of projects done with gEDA, KiCAD users seems to
be more childreen type, making boards with a power LED and a led driver
chip...
kicad is
On May 19, 2011, at 8:21 AM, Kai-Martin Knaak wrote:
Vanessa Ezekowitz wrote:
KMK didn't say what he means by unusable,
Most immediately: The symbols in the default lib do not contain footprint
attributes. Not even an empty ones. This prevents them to just-work for
the most common
On Thu, 19 May 2011 15:57:12 +0200
Kai-Martin Knaak kn...@iqo.uni-hannover.de wrote:
Stephan Boettcher wrote:
The way to promote gedasymbols and to fix the default library is to
remove the default library, except for a small set of very generic
symbols.
ack.
This set of symbols
On Thu, 19 May 2011 08:36:50 -0600
John Doty j...@noqsi.com wrote:
On May 19, 2011, at 8:21 AM, Kai-Martin Knaak wrote:
Vanessa Ezekowitz wrote:
KMK didn't say what he means by unusable,
Most immediately: The symbols in the default lib do not contain footprint
attributes. Not
On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 02:12:06PM -0400, Vanessa Ezekowitz wrote:
On Thu, 19 May 2011 08:36:50 -0600
John Doty j...@noqsi.com wrote:
On May 19, 2011, at 8:21 AM, Kai-Martin Knaak wrote:
Vanessa Ezekowitz wrote:
KMK didn't say what he means by unusable,
Most immediately:
On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 10:27 AM, Stephan Boettcher
boettc...@physik.uni-kiel.de wrote:
Kai-Martin Knaak kn...@iqo.uni-hannover.de writes:
Stephan Boettcher wrote:
The way to promote gedasymbols and to fix the default library is to
remove the default library, except for a small set of very
No, but what would be really cool is if gschem knew about PCB symbols
so that when you open the properties window, footprint is a dropdown
list of available PCB footprints.
We're going over old ground now...
http://www.delorie.com/pcb/component-dbs.html
First, in gschem/gattrib, the the
Stephan:
...
I still do not know where the pcb users manual is to be found.
...
You can find it in the git repo. as pcb/doc/pcb.pdf,
but you have to build it first.
Regards,
/Karl Hammar
---
Aspö Data
Lilla Aspö 148
S-742 94
k...@aspodata.se (Karl Hammar) writes:
Stephan:
...
I still do not know where the pcb users manual is to be found.
...
You can find it in the git repo. as pcb/doc/pcb.pdf,
but you have to build it first.
:-)
--
Stephan
___
geda-user mailing
On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 6:45 AM, Stephan Boettcher
boettc...@physik.uni-kiel.de wrote:
I still do not know where the pcb users manual is to be found. I found
PCB home page (pcb.gpleda.org) top level link in navigation box on the
left: Manual. Choose your version. One could argue about how good
We're going over old ground now...
[1]http://www.delorie.com/pcb/component-dbs.html
First, in gschem/gattrib, the the GUI has a way of querying the
database for potential values of attributes - such as choosing
variants, picking parts from official part lists, sticking
Andrew Poelstra wrote:
This already invalidates your point.
The point is, that instances of the default library should be instantly
usable for major use cases. And they should be good blueprints for the
creation of the users own instances.
The symbols in the current default lib fail for
Colin D Bennett wrote:
If you put default footprint attributes on the symbols, it is an
invitation to error. It's better to force the user to specify a
footprint for each component.
If you want to force users, you can put in a footprint with an
invalid value. No footprint attribute at all
Am 18.05.2011 um 04:25 schrieb Kai-Martin Knaak:
kicad is the EDA chosen by some high profile open hardware projects:
* reprap (http://reprap.org/wiki/KiCad)
As a RepRapper I can say, there is no such thing like a choosen
EDA. People use what they like most and that's Eagle for some 90% of
On 17/05/2011, John Dotyj...@noqsi.com wrote:
On May 17, 2011, at 9:56 AM, Russell Shaw wrote:
Most guis hide what they do. I believe in them showing the commands they
send internally as a script would (or atleast have the option to show
that) so the user can paste the commands into an
On 18/05/11 12:28, Kai-Martin Knaak wrote:
Russell Shaw wrote:
The problem with KiCAD is 1) C++, 2) Qt.
The problems I encountered with gnetlist were
1) scheme
I think Scheme could be made much more attractive in geda if
it was adequately explained in documentation or a tutorial.
I
Can I enter my own project Super OSD?
[1]http://code.google.com/p/super-osd
On 18 May 2011 03:25, Kai-Martin Knaak [2]k...@lilalaser.de wrote:
Stefan Salewski wrote:
While gEDA/PCB has some serious
users and a large list of projects done with gEDA, KiCAD users seems
to
I'm a gtk hater, and am open to new widget toolkit user interface paradigms,
So, you build pcb with --enable-gui=lesstif ? ;-)
___
geda-user mailing list
geda-user@moria.seul.org
http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
On Tue, 17 May 2011 22:30:27 -0400
DJ Delorie d...@delorie.com wrote:
BTW, what are the show cases for geda/pcb?
There's a list on gpleda.org:
http://geda.seul.org/wiki/geda:links
First, let's be clear that popularity is no indication of usefulness or
goodness of something.
But, if a
On 19/05/11 02:13, DJ Delorie wrote:
I'm a gtk hater, and am open to new widget toolkit user interface paradigms,
So, you build pcb with --enable-gui=lesstif ? ;-)
I do it with gtk whenever i want to poke at it. I know how gtk
works, but it's far too convoluted and burdensome for
Russell Shaw wrote:
I think Scheme could be made much more attractive in geda if
it was adequately explained in documentation or a tutorial.
+1
I wouldn't mind to learn (a new language). But to learn a new language by
almost non-commented code is just too much of a barrier.
On 18/05/2011, Russell Shaw rjs...@netspace.net.au wrote:
On 17/05/2011, John Dotyj...@noqsi.com wrote:
On May 17, 2011, at 9:56 AM, Russell Shaw wrote:
Most guis hide what they do. I believe in them showing the commands
they
send internally as a script would (or atleast
On May 17, 2011, at 8:25 PM, Kai-Martin Knaak wrote:
BTW, what are the show cases for geda/pcb
One of gEDA's great strengths is that it works well with other tools, so it's a
great toolkit when the project isn't contained within a pure EDA environment.
The trouble is that such a project is
On Wed, 2011-05-18 at 19:26 +0200, Kai-Martin Knaak wrote:
Russell Shaw wrote:
I think Scheme could be made much more attractive in geda if
it was adequately explained in documentation or a tutorial.
+1
I wouldn't mind to learn (a new language). But to learn a new language by
almost
Kai-Martin Knaak kn...@iqo.uni-hannover.de writes:
Russell Shaw wrote:
I think Scheme could be made much more attractive in geda if
it was adequately explained in documentation or a tutorial.
+1
I wouldn't mind to learn (a new language). But to learn a new language by
almost
Is there a Python api for gEDA?
Because that would be really nice...
On 18 May 2011 20:56, Stefan Salewski [1]m...@ssalewski.de wrote:
On Wed, 2011-05-18 at 19:26 +0200, Kai-Martin Knaak wrote:
Russell Shaw wrote:
I think Scheme could be made much more attractive in geda
Colin D Bennett co...@gibibit.com writes:
First, let's be clear that popularity is no indication of usefulness or
goodness of something.
But, if a product is less widely-chosen, perhaps there is something
that can be done to improve the learning curve for new users...
Why is there so much
On May 18, 2011, at 1:56 PM, Stefan Salewski wrote:
The problem in not only missing documentation, but the fact that not all
geda guile code is really clean and beautiful, as stated by one of the
experts some time ago on this list. I don't know if that is true, but I
have seen that even
Stephan Boettcher wrote:
Why is there so much discussion here about the needs of potential new
users, instead of the needs of current, loving, existing users? Let's
make the tools perfect for us (that includes discoverability and
documentation improvements), and not cater for not-yet-users.
Stephan Boettcher wrote:
Judging the
code by lack of comments without knowledge of the language is too.
I referred to the lack of documentation, rather than lack of comments.
The particular case I had in mind, is the interaction of gnetlist's
C front-end with the scheme back-ends. There seems
On Wed, 18 May 2011 18:39:43 -0600
John Doty j...@noqsi.com wrote:
On May 18, 2011, at 6:31 PM, Kai-Martin Knaak wrote:
Examples
are the next to unusable default library of geda
As has been discussed many times, this cannot be fixed, since there
is no narrow, common use case for
On Wed, 18 May 2011 18:39:43 -0600
John Doty j...@noqsi.com wrote:
On May 18, 2011, at 6:31 PM, Kai-Martin Knaak wrote:
Examples
are the next to unusable default library of geda
As has been discussed many times, this cannot be fixed, since there is no
narrow, common use case for
On May 18, 2011, at 7:57 PM, Geoff Swan wrote:
Actually I think gEDA is not too bad for components/symbols really.
What the default library lacks, gedsymbols often has. With a little bit
more promotion of gedasymbols I think people wouldn't have such an
issue.
In terms of the
On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 09:24:53PM +0100, Thomas Oldbury wrote:
Is there a Python api for gEDA?
I once made a GPMI plugin for PCB. Unfortunately it contains only a
small set of interface libraries so what can be done was limited. I've
written an SVG exporter prototype in tcl, an interactive
On 17/05/11 02:44, DJ Delorie wrote:
I've always been interested in CAD programs and thought of making
a schematic/pcb one from scratch.
I've never truly understood why people would rewrite a (potentially)
huge application set just because. Why not start with the existing
tools and just
On Tue, 2011-05-17 at 20:36 +1000, Russell Shaw wrote:
On 17/05/11 02:44, DJ Delorie wrote:
I've always been interested in CAD programs and thought of making
a schematic/pcb one from scratch.
I've never truly understood why people would rewrite a (potentially)
huge application set
On Tue, 2011-05-17 at 20:36 +1000, Russell Shaw wrote:
On 17/05/11 02:44, DJ Delorie wrote:
Hi,
A schematic/pcb editor is not huge unless it's done in an inelegant way.
A very first task i would do is create a decent gui for drawing the symbol
and
footprint in the schematic/pcb
On May 17, 2011, at 4:36 AM, Russell Shaw wrote:
Hi,
A schematic/pcb editor is not huge unless it's done in an inelegant way.
A very first task i would do is create a decent gui for drawing the symbol
and footprint in the schematic/pcb library, and make a decent library browser.
Then i
On 17/05/11 22:31, Stefan Salewski wrote:
On Tue, 2011-05-17 at 20:36 +1000, Russell Shaw wrote:
On 17/05/11 02:44, DJ Delorie wrote:
Hi,
A schematic/pcb editor is not huge unless it's done in an inelegant way.
A very first task i would do is create a decent gui for drawing the symbol and
On Tue, 2011-05-17 at 12:02 +0100, Peter Clifton wrote:
Core features in the PCB editor can be pretty complex. We have a lot of
code for dealing with polygon geometry,
May we consider use of clipping libraries like
http://angusj.com/delphi/clipper.php
On 17/05/11 22:40, John Doty wrote:
On May 17, 2011, at 4:36 AM, Russell Shaw wrote:
Hi, A schematic/pcb editor is not huge unless it's done in an inelegant
way.
A very first task i would do is create a decent gui for drawing the symbol
and footprint in the schematic/pcb library, and make a
On Tue, 2011-05-17 at 23:35 +1000, Russell Shaw wrote:
I was expert at using high-end HP DCS/PCDS on unix boxes 20 years
ago before it got discontinued, and a few other cad systems since then.
A very first task i would do is create a decent gui for drawing the
symbol and footprint in
On 17/05/11 23:43, Stefan Salewski wrote:
On Tue, 2011-05-17 at 23:35 +1000, Russell Shaw wrote:
I was expert at using high-end HP DCS/PCDS on unix boxes 20 years
ago before it got discontinued, and a few other cad systems since then.
A very first task i would do is create a decent gui for
On May 17, 2011, at 7:45 AM, Russell Shaw wrote:
A well-stocked workshop is nothing more than a multitool workshop.
With that attitude, you'll botch the job.
There's
no reason why a schematic and pcb editor can't have tight coupling and
still interact with all external tools.
The
On 18/05/11 00:15, John Doty wrote:
On May 17, 2011, at 7:45 AM, Russell Shaw wrote:
A well-stocked workshop is nothing more than a multitool workshop.
With that attitude, you'll botch the job.
There's no reason why a schematic and pcb editor can't have tight coupling
and still interact
On Tue, 2011-05-17 at 23:59 +1000, Russell Shaw wrote:
Instead of blindly reinventing the wheel, i always look in detail
at what currently exists.
Maybe KiCAD is a better starting point for you?
Written in C++ with wxWidgets, it is available for multiple OS including
windows. Here in Germany
On 18/05/11 00:30, Stefan Salewski wrote:
On Tue, 2011-05-17 at 23:59 +1000, Russell Shaw wrote:
Instead of blindly reinventing the wheel, i always look in detail
at what currently exists.
Maybe KiCAD is a better starting point for you?
Written in C++ with wxWidgets, it is available for
On 18/05/11 00:30, Stefan Salewski wrote:
On Tue, 2011-05-17 at 23:59 +1000, Russell Shaw wrote:
Instead of blindly reinventing the wheel, i always look in detail
at what currently exists.
Maybe KiCAD is a better starting point for you?
Written in C++ with wxWidgets, it is available for
On 18/05/11 00:30, Stefan Salewski wrote:
On Tue, 2011-05-17 at 23:59 +1000, Russell Shaw wrote:
Instead of blindly reinventing the wheel, i always look in detail
at what currently exists.
Maybe KiCAD is a better starting point for you?
Written in C++ with wxWidgets, it is available for
On Wed, 2011-05-18 at 00:41 +1000, Russell Shaw wrote:
The problem with KiCAD is 1) C++, 2) Qt.
C++ was a *really* bad idea. Qt i don't like because it was fundamentally
architected just for the sake of hiding code from users using the MOC
preprocessor that used to be closed source.
On May 17, 2011, at 9:06 AM, Russell Shaw wrote:
It seems like too much redundancy to have two projects with similar
uses (which i wouldn't like), and i don't like forking either.
But your vision is an integrated tool, while gEDA is a toolkit.
I'm still studying geda, but if i did some
On Wed, 2011-05-18 at 01:06 +1000, Russell Shaw wrote:
I'm still studying geda, but if i did some real work on it, it
would end up having an extra file format, extra guis, and a closer
sch/pcb link.
Maybe a good starting point is defining a new extended file format. (For
current pcb
On 18/05/11 01:41, John Doty wrote:
On May 17, 2011, at 9:06 AM, Russell Shaw wrote:
It seems like too much redundancy to have two projects with similar uses
(which i wouldn't like), and i don't like forking either.
But your vision is an integrated tool, while gEDA is a toolkit.
I'm
On May 17, 2011, at 9:56 AM, Russell Shaw wrote:
Most guis hide what they do. I believe in them showing the commands they
send internally as a script would (or atleast have the option to show that)
so the user can paste the commands into an external file if needed.
I've done GUIs that wrap
Hi John,
Russell Shaw wrote:
There's no reason why a schematic and pcb editor can't have tight
coupling and still interact with all external tools.
John Doty wrote:
The architectures are different. To flexibly interact with external
tools, you need the interfaces to be simple text files.
There are already two IPC architectures in place between gschem and
PCB:
1. Text files.
2. The user.
3. dbus
(at least, we had it working at one point)
___
geda-user mailing list
geda-user@moria.seul.org
On May 17, 2011, at 11:15 AM, DJ Delorie wrote:
There are already two IPC architectures in place between gschem and
PCB:
1. Text files.
2. The user.
3. dbus
(at least, we had it working at one point)
dbus is one of the approaches I had in mind when I wrote:
On Tue, 2011-05-17 at 15:36 +0200, Stefan Salewski wrote:
On Tue, 2011-05-17 at 12:02 +0100, Peter Clifton wrote:
Core features in the PCB editor can be pretty complex. We have a lot of
code for dealing with polygon geometry,
May we consider use of clipping libraries like
Hi guys,
That's not true at all John. Have you ever heard/seen a program called
Alias Wavefront Maya? It used to be from Silicon Graphics, but they
sold it to Autodesk a couple of years ago.
A program for 3D CGI which has quite an innovative popup menu system
with something called hotboxes and
That's a shot of it:
http://imageshack.us/f/84/shoti.png/
It lacks a two cadinal pointers in the image, as I was testing don't
remember what when I had stop it.
I also forgot to say is done right on top of Xlib and uses XResources
for font color, background and border color. No dependencies or
On Mon, 16 May 2011 16:41:11 -0700
Steven Michalske smichal...@gmail.com wrote:
On May 16, 2011, at 4:25 PM, al davis ad...@freeelectron.net wrote:
On Monday 16 May 2011, Steven Michalske wrote:
But lawyers can use that clause as a loophole to invalidate
legitimate patents.
Minor
On May 17, 2011, at 12:57 PM, Eduardo Costa wrote:
A program for 3D CGI which has quite an innovative popup menu system
with something called hotboxes and cardinal menus (the one shown
bellow). 200% productive, and much better than anyother
existing/deployed nowadays:
That's not the toolkit
Stefan Salewski wrote:
While gEDA/PCB has some serious
users and a large list of projects done with gEDA, KiCAD users seems to
be more childreen type, making boards with a power LED and a led driver
chip...
kicad is the EDA chosen by some high profile open hardware projects:
* reprap
BTW, what are the show cases for geda/pcb?
There's a list on gpleda.org:
http://geda.seul.org/wiki/geda:links
Personally, climate control and electrical monitoring in my house is
done by gEDA/PCB projects.
___
geda-user mailing list
DJ Delorie wrote:
There's a list on gpleda.org:
http://geda.seul.org/wiki/geda:links
What would be the top five with regard to public visibility, nerdiness, or
technological impact?
---)kaimartin(---
--
Kai-Martin Knaak
Email: k...@familieknaak.de
Öffentlicher PGP-Schlüssel:
I've always been interested in CAD programs and thought of making
a schematic/pcb one from scratch.
I've never truly understood why people would rewrite a (potentially)
huge application set just because. Why not start with the existing
tools and just rewrite the parts you're interested in?
On May 16, 2011, at 10:44 AM, DJ Delorie wrote:
I've always been interested in CAD programs and thought of making
a schematic/pcb one from scratch.
I've never truly understood why people would rewrite a (potentially)
huge application set just because. Why not start with the existing
Why not start with the existing
tools and just rewrite the parts you're interested in?
License?
(and if you really want to get *that* involved in pcb layout tools,
there *are* parts of pcb that could stand to be ripped out and
replaced... ;)
Might interfere with someones script running
Why not start with the existing
tools and just rewrite the parts you're interested in?
License?
True. One of the benefits of the GPL is that people can bsae their
work off existing work, but not everyone wants to offer that benefit
to others.
I really don't feel bad for people who need
On May 16, 2011, at 10:21 AM, DJ Delorie d...@delorie.com wrote:
Why not start with the existing
tools and just rewrite the parts you're interested in?
License?
True. One of the benefits of the GPL is that people can bsae their
work off existing work, but not everyone wants to
Biggest determent to the open source is now GPLv3
OT here, since our stuff is still GPLv2
___
geda-user mailing list
geda-user@moria.seul.org
http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
On Mon, 2011-05-16 at 12:44 -0400, DJ Delorie wrote:
I've always been interested in CAD programs and thought of making
a schematic/pcb one from scratch.
I've never truly understood why people would rewrite a (potentially)
huge application set just because. Why not start with the existing
On Monday 16 May 2011, Steven Michalske wrote:
But lawyers can use that clause as a loophole to invalidate
legitimate patents.
Minor side effect of lawyers can use that clause as a loophole
to invalidate ILLegitimate patents ... which outnumber the
ligitimate ones a million to one.
On May 16, 2011, at 2:45 PM, DJ Delorie d...@delorie.com wrote:
Biggest determent to the open source is now GPLv3
OT here, since our stuff is still GPLv2
Sorry for the OT bit, but v2 got a black eye from v3, commercially that is.
I know of two companies shying away from all
Steven Michalske wrote:
In a perfect world this would not be an issue. But lawyers can use that
clause as a loophole to invalidate legitimate patents.
The notion of software patents is by no means obvious. In fact, it is
subject to serous doubt. See the undulating tale of conflicting
Sorry for the OT bit, but v2 got a black eye from v3, commercially
that is. I know of two companies shying away from all gpl, because
of the or later clause in v2 and how you can apply v3 to it. Is
that still in our gpl v2 license?
That phrase does not allow the user to change the licence,
On May 16, 2011, at 4:25 PM, al davis ad...@freeelectron.net wrote:
On Monday 16 May 2011, Steven Michalske wrote:
But lawyers can use that clause as a loophole to invalidate
legitimate patents.
Minor side effect of lawyers can use that clause as a loophole
to invalidate ILLegitimate
On May 16, 2011, at 4:30 PM, Kai-Martin Knaak k...@lilalaser.de wrote:
Steven Michalske wrote:
In a perfect world this would not be an issue. But lawyers can use that
clause as a loophole to invalidate legitimate patents.
The notion of software patents is by no means obvious. In
hit send too soon
On May 16, 2011, at 4:30 PM, Kai-Martin Knaak k...@lilalaser.de wrote:
Steven Michalske wrote:
In a perfect world this would not be an issue. But lawyers can use that
clause as a loophole to invalidate legitimate patents.
The notion of software patents is by no
91 matches
Mail list logo
