I should mention that for both comercial tools and geda I tend to build my own symbol and foot print libaries.
Steve Meier wrote: > Stuart Brorson wrote: > >> If you accept this organic vision of what gEDA is about, then you can >> do a lot of powerful things with the software, and you will be happy! >> If you want a carefully administered software suite with >> pre-established symbols and footprints all meeting exacting standards, >> then you may be disappointed. >> >> > > Cutting this snipet out is taking what Stuart is talking about > completely out of context. Which I have now just done. > > But there is an important point hidden in this snipet. And that is that > for any cad tool there is a risk that the symbols have mistakes or > aren't perfect. With closed source eda tools and their distributed > libraries you are trusting a group of people that you might have little > to no direct communication with and whom might have alterior motives > other then their user needs, while with geda you have a community > support group that might not every symbol that you desire but at least > is available to talk the issues. In both cases there is little warenty > against bad files. In the long run my bet is that a community can grow > "organically" a better library and library format then the commercial > tools. But the jury is still out. > > Steve M. > > > _______________________________________________ > geda-user mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user > > _______________________________________________ geda-user mailing list [email protected] http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
