On Jul 13, 2007, at 6:09 AM, Kai-Martin Knaak wrote:

> On Wed, 11 Jul 2007 12:53:42 -0600, John Doty wrote:
>
>> Given that a modern computer system comes with very flexible and
>> powerful mechanisms to manage files, I find it extremely  
>> convenient to
>> "factor" projects into small files. Manage them with a revision  
>> control
>> system.
>
> Currently, there is no easy way to fully control where gschem and
> gsch2pcb look for symbols and footprints. It is even difficult to make
> them ignore the systems libraries. (see the threads in geda user on  
> this
> topic)

It's not hard with gschem. Apparently gsch2pcb needs some fixing, but  
I don't use pcb so I cannot make an informed comment here. Changing  
the front end to fix a problem in a particular back end may not be  
the correct procedure.

>
>
>> Build products (netlists, docs, microcode, etc.) with Makefiles.
>> Refactor, fork, and merge largely by moving and customizing files.
>
> This is a different can of worms.

Hardworking, productive worms!

>
>>
>> Perhaps for a single project on a single page, the embedded  
>> approach is
>> better. But I have a web of related projects, some very complex. That
>> gEDA's extreme flexibility makes this manageable is a strong  
>> reason to
>> use gEDA. Please don't compromise that flexibility.
>
> Note, this thread is _not_ about a reduction of flexibility. It is  
> about
> default settings.

If symbols are embedded by default, I will surely forget to unembed  
them when needed. Then I'll waste time tracking down bugs due to  
symbol edits not propagating into the project.

> This mainly affects how gschem should behave for the
> uninitiated newbie and intermediate users. To them, the current  
> behavior
> very likely leads to disaster, when they start to work with local
> libraries as rightly recommended by the docs.

I don't see any disaster here. But maybe you're referring to  
gsch2pcb's problems: those should be fixed, but I believe no change  
to gschem is needed for that.

John Doty              Noqsi Aerospace, Ltd.
http://www.noqsi.com/
[EMAIL PROTECTED]




_______________________________________________
geda-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-dev

Reply via email to