On Sun, Mar 05, 2006 at 01:53:18PM -0500, Dan McMahill wrote: > Karel Kulhavy wrote: > >On Mon, Feb 27, 2006 at 12:11:22AM +0000, Marc Price wrote: > > > >>Ive tried multiple times now using Grep to find the footprint for a > >>resistor i add it and it doesnt work! every time i try it either uses > >>the wrong footprint or says error, surely a footprint selector of some > >>sort needs to be added to either gattrib or gschem in order to simplify > >>this process. > >> > >>Sorry i got to say this i like the look and feel of gEDA but no common > >>sense has gone into making these programs work together. > > > > > >You could fix this by saving all m4 footprints as newlib and starting > >your new fork of PCB project with this. It should not be too much work, > >especially if automated, and increase the comfort tremendously. I > >estimate it's unlikely the developers will do it because this theme will > >trigger an avalanche of discussions and cause them to be paralyzed by > >analysis paralysis. > > This is an example of where you seem to go out of your way to be rude. > > For your information, this has actually been implemented and just needs > some testing. You might also have noted that it has been mentioned on > this list that such a thing was under way. > > I'll note that on the topic of footprints and a few other items, nothing > has been done not because of "analysis paralysis" but because we do this > in our free time which is limited and because I've seen the results of > jumping in with coding and putting a lot of effort when there was a poor > or no up front design. > > Perhaps you think no design is required for these systems? > > You could help the situation if you would actually take up some these > issues and actually contribute some work to get them done rather than > spending your time spewing insults.
I sent a patch to fix "Karel Kulhavy,,," in the output - will this be incorporated or not? CL<
