Ok, if that is the way this group works. I have been told that these
tools can be useful and I assumed that would be the goal of
development. I see lot of comments going in all directions with no
clear indication of how any of it would be used. But I'm just a
practical sort of guy. If you guys are into the "idea" of what
schematic software can be rather than the practical side of what is
needed by the guys in the trenches, that's fine. It's your
software. This is all new to me.
I actually don't use the gEDA tools other than Gerbv which has some
issues under Windows. I've used FreePCB and make my small
contributions there. But there is only one developer and it is not
clear that he wants help. So I can only make suggestions and not
able to add to the code itself. I do provide peripheral support by
advising newbies and help with the wiki at the moment.
If there is anything I can help with here, I'm glad to do so. Have a nice one.
Rick
At 12:21 PM 8/16/2010, you wrote:
Rick Collins wrote:
Why not start with what you
are trying to do in the layout, consider what the layout tool needs
to make that happen, then trace that back to what is needed in the
schematic to support the layout?
There are lots of different users of these programs, and they have
different goals.
You're not going to show up and get your way in a FOSS development community
unless your suggestion is obvious and brilliant at the same time. IOW
slim and none.
When would you want a layout to control impedance on a
portion of a net and not the entire net?
Who knows? Volunteers making a tool do nothing but your special
cases is not going to happen.
Volunteers making a tool for controlling impedances when and where told to
has a chance of happening.
JG
_______________________________________________
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
