Mail Archives: geda-user/2021/04/29/08:53:22
Hi Glenn,
On Wed, 28 Apr 2021, Glenn (glimrick AT epilitimus DOT com) [via
geda-user AT delorie DOT com] wrote:
> 1. Do you have any objections to the symbol hierarchy being more than
> one level deep. Specifically there are both control (e.g.
> xspice_processor-1.sym) and functional (e.g. xspice_adb-1.sym) xspice
> specific devices. My preference is to put them in a directory structure
> like:
> symbols/xspice/control
> symbols/xspice/functional
I agree. In order for this to work, you'll probably have to replace
"component-library" with "component-library-search" in geda-clib.scm.
> 2. There are multiple groups of symbols, Some are xspice specific (e.g.
> xspice_dab-1.sym), others are not (e.g. nfet-1.sym [geda currently
> doesn't provide a jfet symbol so I drew one]). Do you prefer all the
> symbols placed as one commit, one group per commit, one symbol per
> commit? Keeping in mind different symbols go to different directories.
I don't see a point in splitting xspice-specific symbols into multiple
commits. However, for symbols which are not specific to xspice, care must
be taken to conform to the conventions of the default library (which may
conflict with xspice). I'd rather not open the issue of changing the
default library right now, but if you must, please group each logical
change as one commit and provide a rationale why this change is necessary.
Roland
- Raw text -