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=NvJnvqvsmf/N+4B4jXftTo7hqsg4iKFoe4m0xhBW3X8=;
	b=xQbEVdEwip1zPoVEPQIrEdLowSqH20q3teRaaz9nThqJskSb0HBWmo2EKKgS7dN6Cd
	W/U7RXHgRldE9BcwvC4iBvx5Dt789HYUiEuqLb28TZpb+yUM52ivY/zVRQJT/q/3JFdM
	QPeZA6ViBv7A0a6w1E/1hFUk6d8tJQl9yH172cGwtkkZTQgugInP9tkUbwST8GEQELtF
	daEC7Q2y8zBNWEl4UXke0hgpvTZR3kPE8fP62tsgZsieKrMSiaV9rnhrutvkAn4BwKxE
	LSjj2e0z3D6dT7CpPlpPumuBwAtMGs90j7cuOSx+nGJ5BwoZ3se6XqQBlES13LPw6RJ4
	n5TA==
MIME-Version:	1.0
X-Received:	by 10.42.50.3 with SMTP id y3mr37724icf.12.1394662421780; Wed, 12
	Mar 2014 15:13:41 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To:	<20140312121641.9E8738020170@turkos.aspodata.se>
References:	<CAG4ve9LgHNoVZoGaGgF67tadJ_n=L6Uy1g=UPPrkM0fL6Rgufw AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<20140127234944 DOT 924148045B78 AT turkos DOT aspodata DOT se>
	<CAG4ve9+3jhFJ1Cr6CLUyLX_y02uigJECiUCwxjUWdP=heVocqg AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<20140128201110 DOT DF7D78045B78 AT turkos DOT aspodata DOT se>
	<20140129072550 DOT GA24560 AT localhost DOT localdomain>
	<CAG4ve9+v9QxNRaPSFkmGfr6bKsv7km-Gt_gwXF7Eh4TX+AmNug AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<CAOP4iL2JBUdF93kZF-iQ9Rv+VTN3iXoT+6C4LoBi5qaMxof=sA AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<CAG4ve9+QsUf=nVXPe-f3VddGiqHn8sjZUJNkdu3QV1cOQDWiAg AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<20140309173951 DOT 738798020179 AT turkos DOT aspodata DOT se>
	<531CF3BE DOT 8070407 AT ecosensory DOT com>
	<CAG4ve9LKJS1RxPZxUdOSwFifQXoVJtJMOV=7PMs2vrjf70L1KQ AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<CAOP4iL3mQJjH_2gOZ1E=POzpiLuJKTxOu_FN7UD-=BfV6BOQ1w AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<CAG4ve9L-HKjGH3SZ4UFHfQPonkvxJbGoqpnQnxAmcurNaFuRaQ AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<CAOP4iL1d0WQ5x65NfiXoR3uHGP8Hm8uUKS8n_gWSGsFrY6JSMA AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<20140311164227 DOT D853D8020170 AT turkos DOT aspodata DOT se>
	<CAG4ve9+2bfaoZYSTKgfWNTQ=GtDZ+wQeioiqstVEK2yhp=Y=Tg AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<CAC4O8c8ySdBMRRYVZY7MaDhSpGSwqwcUsjY4xdWMKPdTRL-NEA AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<20140312121641 DOT 9E8738020170 AT turkos DOT aspodata DOT se>
Date:	Wed, 12 Mar 2014 15:13:41 -0700
Message-ID:	<CAC4O8c8=tCXae2TGwZizmcacpnLwtLsG4=6NbvOFVqvyeJQHfQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject:	Re: [geda-user] identical symbol names
From:	Britton Kerin <britton DOT kerin 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

On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 5:16 AM,  <karl AT aspodata DOT se> wrote:
> Britton Kerin:
>> <svetonomer AT gmail DOT com> wrote:
>> > Unfortunately I think it will not be completed yet.
>> > This path is extremely laborious and time-consuming.
>> > It will therefore be abandoned as a result.
>> > And each one will, as before, to use for its proven crutches that will
>> > wander around the various corners of the Internet.
>>
>> Well I started out thinking its a bad idea but now I guess I'm convinced
>> integration sounds nice.
>
> What do mean with integration here, to include the syms a
> in-file-lib section, or to integrate gschem with git (or the like) ?

I have no religious belief one way or the other on this but the in-file-lib
sounds to me more likely to happen.

>> I think people should be ambitious and ask themselves what could be done to
>> get to the point where subcircuit designs could be gracefully distributed,
>> ideally with a default PCB layout/BOM that they map to.  People always say
>> you need different design rules, layouts etc. but truth is you often don't.
>> I'm sick of redesigning power supplies every project for example.
>
> Yes, it would be wery nice to be able to have function blocks both in
> gschem and pcb, and e.g. to be able to use that adj. ldo solution,
> but for 4.3V insted, and gschem calculates the correct resistor values
> (from formulas in the ldo subcircuit) and pcb picks it up complete with
> traces and all (which is done once and for all).
>
>> So you need either an ironclad convention for how (heavy) symbols used in
>> these modules are stored and versioned, or some way to freeze and integrate
>> them into a subdesign.  The first alternative is perfectly possible in
>> theory, but: a. it hasn't happened yet for gEDA, and b. more generally it
>> hasn't happened well for many other languages/libraries.  Also its not clear
>> that its better, assuming the conventions are honored enough to be useful,
>> the complexity is still there, its just enshrined as convention rather than
>> written down in the core code.
>
> I don't understand you here.
>
> If you would like to discuss subcircuits and the like, perhaps it's
> better to start a new thread.

Someone a while back was talking about how schematics would be more portable
if they came with an in-file-lib, this would apply to subcircuit schematics
as well I would think.  Its not the only thing you need for distributable
modules of course but its one piece.

Britton

- Raw text -