I would love to see all symbols and landpatterns bear proper and correct attributation.
I strongly suggest that any conversion tool should add comments into the generated files that state the file was created with so and so a tool and the source for the generated file was such and such. Any conversion tool distributed with geda should have this as a requirement. Steve M. On Fri, 2008-01-04 at 18:03 +0000, Peter Clifton wrote: > On Fri, 2008-01-04 at 12:35 -0500, Ales Hvezda wrote: > > >I looked into the eagle -> kicad converters. > > > > Related to this discussion, I was referrer log surfing :) and ran > > across this: > > > > http://blog.mithis.net/archives/pcb/23-eagle2geda-symbol-converter > > > > Note, I don't ever want to see an Eagle symbol in the gEDA/gaf > > distribution. > > Definitely a wise stance there, unless the author of the Eagle symbol > gave explicit permission for this, under agreeable licensing terms. > > Having tools available allowing users to migrate their artworks from > other packages can't be a bad thing though. > > > With regards distributed symbols, I would welcome a drive to _remove_ > some shipped components from the main library, placing others into > collections which can be installed separately if desired. > > We do have to weigh up the desire to have a clean component set with the > desire to be newbie friendly though (having symbols for components they > want already made, presented in an easily discoverable manner). > > _______________________________________________ geda-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-dev
