X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f X-Recipient: geda-user AT delorie DOT com From: Roger Williams Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_1D77A6FB-3920-46E4-80EF-348D17C254F7" Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\)) Subject: Re: [geda-user] SchemeIt Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2014 13:19:14 -0400 References:

<00E6DEBC-05AB-4079-9E88-152225FF6DDE AT qux DOT com> <87wq80xauh DOT fsf AT hotmail DOT com> To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6) X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - server.patechwriters.net X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - delorie.com X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - qux.com X-Get-Message-Sender-Via: server.patechwriters.net: authenticated_id: raw AT qux DOT org X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: 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 Precedence: bulk --Apple-Mail=_1D77A6FB-3920-46E4-80EF-348D17C254F7 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Very true! But that doesn't address Enoch's main proposal, which is that = "geda needs to adapt to this new trend" [collaborative schematic capture = and PCB layout] by developing [SCM] capabilities at the schematic = abstraction level, not the text string level. Indeed, if the desired model is really multiple designers simultaneously = editing the same schematic page, some clever rethinking about SCM is = needed. But I don't believe that anyone really wants to work that way, = and I'm sceptical about upverter's ability to cleanly support it. In my = experience, collaborative design always means different designers = working on different parts of the design. And SCM tools like git and svn = do a good job of supporting that working model. Now, what upverter does offer is a very large component library and = handy graphical tools to simplify footprint and symbol creation, and = tight integration between the schematic capture and PCB layout tools. --=20 Roger Williams Chief Technical Officer, Qux Corporation 245 Russell Street, Hadley, MA 01035, USA Tel +1 508 287-1420 * Fax +1 508 302-0230 On 16 Oct 2014, at 12:56, Ouabache Designworks = wrote: >=20 >=20 > On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 9:01 AM, Enoch wrote: >=20 > Hi, >=20 > How do people here feel about collaboration tools such as: > https://upverter.com/ >=20 > It is being promoted even by the Open Hardware "BeagleBone Black" > project: http://beagleboard.org/black (see "Fork me on Upverter"). >=20 > It seems to me that geda needs to adapt to this new trend, > somehow... that is, develop "git" like capabilities at the abstraction > level of the shcematics (not at the primitive sch source lines level). >=20 > Adapt or Die :-) >=20 > Thanks, Enoch. >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 > 1) It costs $$$$$ >=20 > 2) You don`t buy it , you rent it. If the company fails then the tool = stops working. >=20 > 3) You can import from several formats but no mention of export. = Welcome to the Hotel California. >=20 > 4) If that company dies then they take all of your current and past = work with them. >=20 > Its all about the data. You must never lose access to any past design = work that you have done >=20 >=20 > John Eaton >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 > =20 >=20 --Apple-Mail=_1D77A6FB-3920-46E4-80EF-348D17C254F7 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Very = true! But that doesn't address Enoch's main proposal, which is that = "geda needs to adapt to this new trend" [collaborative schematic capture = and PCB layout] by developing [SCM] capabilities at the schematic = abstraction level, not the text string level.

Indeed, = if the desired model is really multiple = designers simultaneously editing the same schematic page, = some clever rethinking about SCM is needed. But I don't believe that = anyone really wants to work that way, and I'm sceptical about upverter's = ability to cleanly support it. In my experience, collaborative design = always means different designers working on different parts of the = design. And SCM tools like git and svn do a good job of supporting that = working model.

Now, what upverter does = offer is a very large component library and handy graphical tools to = simplify footprint and symbol creation, and tight integration between = the schematic capture and PCB layout tools.

--
Roger Williams <roger AT qux DOT com>
Chief Technical = Officer, Qux Corporation
245 Russell Street, Hadley, MA 01035, = USA
Tel +1 508 287-1420 * Fax +1 508 302-0230

On 16 Oct 2014, at 12:56, Ouabache Designworks <z3qmtr45 AT gmail DOT com> = wrote:

On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 9:01 AM, Enoch <ixew AT hotmail DOT com> wrote:

Hi,

How do people here feel about collaboration tools such as:
https://upverter.com/

It is being promoted even by the Open Hardware "BeagleBone Black"
project: http://beagleboard.org/black (see "Fork me on = Upverter").

It seems to me that geda needs to adapt to this new trend,
somehow... that is, develop "git" like capabilities at the = abstraction
level of the shcematics (not at the primitive sch source lines = level).

Adapt or Die :-)

Thanks, Enoch.

1) It costs = $$$$$

2) You don`t buy it , you rent it. If the = company fails then the tool stops working.

3) You can = import from several formats but no mention of export. Welcome to the = Hotel California.

4) If that company dies then they = take all of your current and past work with them.

Its = all about the data. You must never lose access to any past design work = that you have done

John = Eaton

<= /div>

= --Apple-Mail=_1D77A6FB-3920-46E4-80EF-348D17C254F7--