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=UdnUQqJKVk0/YdDjTIFgzFBqZDGy2GMQxuQdyzcZUPA=;
	b=pxAkwXRFxja2czeCGRevKksPViOV+pO9mSe7Y8tuvN2quYmgwO+vT/M3S7pYILkM3y
	NdqqnPPdKQWkmoFBI3uShg5gFxs8jEsyuCjRpAVK6vPSnBeMY91qtHb8Lh6wcb4ee6iU
	VzhFWVx1h4ZTmIcOF6y2MlDNo07rYOaqOKrglaP6yja/LtG/sQYiqnovevovGDYhxSK8
	5/6NClnoM1Ja0GYbnr2c7xjzH043zy9b4StFEN72glBiWzgqfuFf3fC2QNy6ZLTsEZ47
	XLoVFPHK7vOn+X6YjAy47bXHM2JMrwkSqig1X+Odg7dehXdG4CsRQKr3ASAnvCbQtPhW
	O9FA==
MIME-Version:	1.0
X-Received:	by 10.112.57.227 with SMTP id l3mr7207199lbq.68.1414536178224;
	Tue, 28 Oct 2014 15:42:58 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To:	<CAC4O8c_2Zm4Nqodg+PciizzGQ8FsihrGhNd4OHFziwRj_-ORUw@mail.gmail.com>
References:	<544EAFDD DOT 1010200 AT ecosensory DOT com>
	<CACNnPRn1JMfVAAssZADq15paLWw-aEazZq_8N9cFGjy3_=UmiQ AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<CAC4O8c_2Zm4Nqodg+PciizzGQ8FsihrGhNd4OHFziwRj_-ORUw AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
Date:	Tue, 28 Oct 2014 17:42:58 -0500
Message-ID:	<CAM2RGhR0RWQ-rSG_sTg7cS-G5vj1Qm84y+ggiRJZ-DFox82KtQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject:	Re: [geda-user] schdiff
From:	Evan Foss <evanfoss 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

Hierarchical schematics, portability and etc is really a matter for a
different thread. I am open to discussing it but please start another
thread to do it in.

On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 5:07 PM, Britton Kerin <britton DOT kerin AT gmail DOT com> wrote:
> 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



-- 
Home
http://evanfoss.googlepages.com/
Work
http://forge.abcd.harvard.edu/gf/project/epl_engineering/wiki/

- Raw text -