Larry Doolittle wrote:
Friends -
Can I call your attention to the disturbingly inconsistent state of
affairs regarding simple passive footprints in pcb? And BTW, my
conversations with other ECAD users suggests the problem is not
unique to this software. All dimensions below are in mils (sorry).
On my list of things to do is a big library cleanup. In CVS, there are
good footprints in ~geda for things like 0603 which follow the IPC
naming conventions. I suppose my next step should be to kill all of the
others.
I'll see if I can come up with a game plan over the holidays for how to
finally address this whole library issue. I want to try and get a
roadmap in place so we can hopefully see a way to get where we want to
go without taking too many wrong turns along the way. Look for
something in another 6 weeks or so.
-Dan
