Mail Archives: geda-user/2016/07/30/10:33:02
Evan Foss wrote:
> There is at least one thread right now where people are just
> re-re-re-re-re-rehashing
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Rehashing of problem areas serves an important purpose. It keeps the
issue in the minds of the community.
> old fights.
I'd rather see people publicly disagree and reiterate arguments than
declare certain topics a no-go area and cover the discord with
silence. More likely than not, the "banned" aspects of the suite will
remain untouched in the code base indefinitely. Consequently, the
problems that gave rise to the controversy persist, too.
This is not just a theoretical scenario I make up on the go. There is
an informal don't-touch agreement in place when it comes to the
default library of symbols. Consequently, the library has not seen
significant changes since about 2006. This would be acceptable if the
default lib were close to perfection. However, it is far from that. A
flat, one stage hierarchy places exotics right next to standard parts.
Digital components by DEC, anyone? This is aggravated by the fact that
the symbols in the library are not ready-to use for the most common
purpose (no footprint attribute).
And please don't tell me that gedasymbols.org makes up for the out of
shape default lib. Gedasymbols is certainly one of the assets of geda.
But it just does not cater efficiently to newcomers. Consequently, one
of the immediate benefits of choosing kicad or eagle over geda is an
immediately usable, extensive library.
The default library of symbols is not the only no-go area established
in geda country. It just happens to be the one on top of my head.
---<)kaimartin(>---
- Raw text -