Mail Archives: geda-user/2015/10/06/12:46:33
On Tue, 6 Oct 2015, John Griessen wrote:
> On 10/05/2015 10:34 PM, gedau AT igor2 DOT repo DOT hu wrote:
>> Again, speaking as an user: it did improve a lot of things for me. After
>> this summer I do have more than 5 features that I was
>> missing for years. Now they are there and I use them.
>
> Hi Igor2,
>
> What is it that made you say it is unlikely your pcb-rnd code will get back
> into the main pcb?
For majority of the features: I think nobody will spend the time to do the
merge.
A few features potentially won't get merged because they are not aligned
with the goals of the mainline.
>
> Do you think your fork uses some changes to the code that are a total stop to
> the rest of us?
So far, I don't think so. The file format is almost 100% compatible and I
have good documentation on the few extra features that mainline pcb
doesn't understand in a .pcb save.
For some users the lack of opengl support in pcb-rnd is a showstopper,
tho.
> I don't see pcb in its present state as much to hang onto before a rewrite.
> It might turn out that
> having pcb in a working state is good as a test vehicle for proving that a
> rewrite like SS's Peted
> is doing all the myriad details needed to still complete a pc board. And then
> once the testing is
> proved, stop adding to pcb and add to peted instead. All the backward
> compatibility needed can be
> handled by translators if the old PCB still works for old designs.
I thought peted was a gschem alternative, doing schematics, not PCBs, but
I might be wrong.
Regards,
Igor2
- Raw text -