Mail Archives: geda-user/2015/04/02/13:55:48
On Thu, 2 Apr 2015, Russell Nelson wrote:
>But you could just as easily say that trying to present the entire library
>to a new user is chaotic. Hrm.
Yup. What I proposed all the way along (especially in the other thread)
was exactly this reasoning:
1. you can't make a huge library well organized enough to be presented to
a new user without making it look large and complex; and as a side note,
the project doesn't have enough manpower at the moment to just coordinate
such a big library centrally
2. there are many good alternatives you would want to present for a new
user; these are local optimums. There are many suboptimal alternatives as
well: for example a largish library that doesn't work out-of-the-box
(current default lib). It's probably better to go for a local optimum than
for a random suboptimal solution (for historical reasons for example). Of
course best would be finding the global optimum, but as there are more
than one use cases and more than one users out there, it's pretty much
non-existent.
3. one of the local optimums is:
- provide an entry level level library that is really small and contains
all the essential symbols and footprints which all properly work together,
out-of-the box
- make the purpose of the entry level lib clear: it's to assist the user
in learning the tools during his first few designs; nothing more, nothing
less
- provide easy ways for the users to browse and download
symbols/footprints from whatever source(s)
- provide strong tools to maintain their libraries they collect that way
I don't find any of these points chaotic at all. However, unlike many of
your proposals, these often provide choices and alternatives, e.g. from
where the user downloads new symbols or how exactly does he organize his
libs. Ability to choose from alternatives is not chaos.
Regards,
Igor2
- Raw text -