At 10:24 AM 29/06/01 +1000, you wrote:
><...snip..>
>I belive Protel could be stronger in the library control and parts
>management area.
>Anybody else have any comments/suggestions on this ?
>
>Regards,
>
>Michael Beavis
Absolutely! Protel is lagging compared to our expectations in the whole
library management area and has been for some time. In this day of QA-this
and ISO-that we really do need better version control of both libraries and
designs. They do know this, I was at a meeting (some time ago) where a
Protel employee was listening and asking questions on what we
wanted. Library management was one area discussed in detail and, I think,
recognised as needing lots of work. I would expect, without any special
knowledge, that the next version of Protel will have *much* better library
handling. I would hope this includes full traceability to the exact
library that each component and symbol was extracted from.
Also, as discussed previously, I would like full support for those
people/companies that wish to run Protel in the "Give every part a symbol"
fashion. This will require the ability to set and lock almost every sch
symbol attribute in the library, including part type.
My USD$0.00000000002 (about AUD$2.47 I think),
Ian
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* To post a message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
* To leave this list visit:
* http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/leave.html
* - or email -
* mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?body=leave%20proteledaforum
*
* Contact the list manager:
* mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
* Browse or Search previous postings:
* http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
