On Fri, Feb 24, 2006 at 06:11:44AM +0100, kmk wrote: > Marvin Dickens wrote: > >>>>I don't know why you don't have one, but I think it would be a big help. > >>>>If you don't have time/serverspace/knowledge/whatever, I can help you > >>>>set one up. > > > PCB is approaching two decades in age. [...] > > Obviously there are two BTS issues: > > 1) There is (currently?) is BTS for gschem and friends > > 2) The BTS for pcb is not mentioned on the gEDA site.
I think that gEDA should have one bugtracking. Or is Cadence, Eagle or Protel calling different hotlines depending if the problem happened during schematic capture or printed board design? CL< > > > > Did you know that PCB is its own project and is not part of gEDA? > > Well, the geda site is a bit ambiguous on that subject. There is "gEDA", > there is "gaf" and there is "gEDA/gaf". > And there is this quote from the first page of http://geda.seul.org/ > /--------- > | Currently, the gEDA project offers [...] and printed circuit board > | (PCB) layout. > \--------- > > Anyway, to me as a user it should be irrelevant where the developers > draw the line between the projects. > > > > never bothered read the most basic of text files that shipped with the > > program. > > I installed the Debian package. The install did not produce any error > and I was able to follow the tutorial. Why should I bother to read the > INSTALL file? (Of course, I would, if I encountered problems). I'd spend > months, if I thoroughly read the README files of half the packages on my > system in advance. > And no, if I discover a bug, I usually do not check check whether the > project maintains a BTS. Instead I report the bug to the Debian BTS and > the Debian maintainer will forward the report to upstream. This system > is IMHO more efficient than reporting every bug directly to the > corresponding developer. > > ---<(kaimartin)>--- > -- > Kai-Martin Knaak > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Blog: http://lilalaser.dyndns.org/blog
