On Tue, 2010-04-06 at 07:59 -0400, Patrick wrote: > Hi Everyone > > This is my first post here, I am also very, very new to PCB design. > > The last thing I want is to create another flame, Eagle vs geda etc... > but am I basically correct that the proprietary Apps have more libraries > and this is the main drawback of the open source alternates? >
Yes, most people using Eagle in the hobby area are indeed very lazy and love to use existing footprints. I think this is indeed one reason why so many people use Eagle instead of FOSS EDA tools like gEDA or KiCAD. But only one reason, there are more, and I think this point will never change. The manpower in the FOSS EDA area is limited, so our number of free, high quality symbols and footprints will be limited. A converting tool from commercial stuff to FOSS may be a solution, but legal issues may exist. > > If this is logical could I get some very rough guess-ti-mates of what > this would cost? Making symbols and footprints is not too much work. (I need between 15 and 90 minutes for a footprint or symbol.) If you have a real project designed by your own, then the work for making symbols and footprints is only a small part. If you only copy an existing project, then indeed the design of footprints and symbols is the biggest task. I do not really get the intension of your post. If you really should not manage to make the needed symbols and footprints by yourself, then I guess you may find indeed people who will support you. For example, I can make single symbols or footprints for you, or maybe greater quantities if you make a donation to unicef, linux-fund, GNU-project, wikipedia... One important point: Format of symbols and footprints may change in future, so it may be indeed not a good idea to generate too much now. I think we should only create what we need now. _______________________________________________ geda-user mailing list [email protected] http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
