X-Authentication-Warning:	delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
DKIM-Signature:	v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
	d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
	h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
	:content-type;
	bh=m9AW/EbOAIWsxidshhaEH0SHuB54SW5WpSjs7cX32Gs=;
	b=RYtcCEj0BZQb+w5dXcq+S6s/ppydBgqI+J4yh/wczcpBSid9S/uTVLLsFkBA8rsxO/
	rZc8stfGOp8p3kL9IAdb7rf+LkO5oHzVQZJ3H+9kanIXEvQaOxYR2l+aBhm+Ya3F/cpj
	CpN6bZLrAER6Submfa7Kd6wHRpGIZamqidRaMD7w/So5y6zHTi2Ci761gTOPyzqBzbxJ
	a+zUPCHvA/p+MVs0fNTSIBEqQSEyfH1SJnUGeU3c7sQq42rKRlKBf2MrGeQLj0YDQ8zf
	cdrreLpETPrjocPiIrDpka+0YWOeam1Fo8g7Y6MTIOHqE7xVnUr78t6Qjmcupma9ICvp
	1Emg==
MIME-Version:	1.0
X-Received:	by 10.107.159.18 with SMTP id i18mr6922856ioe.33.1414534072267;
	Tue, 28 Oct 2014 15:07:52 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To:	<CACNnPRn1JMfVAAssZADq15paLWw-aEazZq_8N9cFGjy3_=UmiQ@mail.gmail.com>
References:	<544EAFDD DOT 1010200 AT ecosensory DOT com>
	<CACNnPRn1JMfVAAssZADq15paLWw-aEazZq_8N9cFGjy3_=UmiQ AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
Date:	Tue, 28 Oct 2014 14:07:52 -0800
Message-ID:	<CAC4O8c_2Zm4Nqodg+PciizzGQ8FsihrGhNd4OHFziwRj_-ORUw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject:	Re: [geda-user] schdiff
From:	Britton Kerin <britton DOT kerin AT gmail DOT com>
To:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Reply-To:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To:	nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 11:07 AM, Abhijit Kshirsagar
<abhijit86k AT gmail DOT com> wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 2:19 AM, John Griessen <john AT ecosensory DOT com> wrote:
>> So, it sounds like you're using gschem as is, without any post processing to
>> sort
>> the .sch file, and a diff in a VCS is useful.  Are you using the idea of
>> collaborators working on places that do not overlap in parts or ICs or
>> modules connected?
>> Do you see value even when people are working on parts and wires that
>> are "near" in netlist terms?
>
> Yes we use gschem as is. Graphical diffs (and well written commit
> mesages) are usually enough - we have rarely needed look closely at
> the diff of the sch. We did have a really messy merge once.
> Plus we use multipage and hierarchical schematics to separate out
> logical entities for the most part, so that helps a lot too. IMO these
> would give a cleaner approach than having to text-diff the sch file at
> all...

+1 +1 +1.  The question is, what can we do to get to the point where
hierarchical schematics are truly portable and sharable?

I know I make these same noises often, sorry, but I to admit I have no real
idea how to start on this.  I get the feeling no one else has a realistic
idea either.

Britton

- Raw text -