X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 2015 15:30:47 -0400
Message-Id: <201509011930.t81JUl0k023348@envy.delorie.com>
From: DJ Delorie <dj AT delorie DOT com>
To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
In-reply-to:
	<CAOP4iL3tHs+q8f3fjCfbBUA_tVqg2W4D3B0D9aF9Hh8Rf0o9vA AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	(geda-user AT delorie DOT com)
Subject: Re: [geda-user] back annotation proposal (RFC)
References: <alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 00 DOT 1508301838470 DOT 6924 AT igor2priv>
	<201508301802 DOT t7UI2twS031311 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com>
	<CAM2RGhRgPQG2WDFVb0SFvMbypyYKS2oYtD=851WHR6fOB4iWdA AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<201508310341 DOT t7V3fcfh022966 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com>
	<20150831111604 DOT 5b1bb421bc015de9a848e8a9 AT gmail DOT com>
	<55E42456 DOT 5080309 AT jump-ing DOT de>
	<20150831112032 DOT GA8963 AT visitor2 DOT iram DOT es>
	<20150831134127 DOT 9dccc4c2563ce7bba5ded79d AT gmail DOT com>
	<55E46E18 DOT 7060102 AT ecosensory DOT com>
	<alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 00 DOT 1508311725150 DOT 6924 AT igor2priv>
	<20150831220701 DOT 929d36b81e49e264f37e61a5 AT gmail DOT com>
	<55E4BDB7 DOT 1080506 AT ecosensory DOT com>
	<alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 00 DOT 1509010353280 DOT 6924 AT igor2priv>
	<20150901084555 DOT b7b8ebd66e7e7a8ba1c8eecf AT gmail DOT com> <CAOP4iL3tHs+q8f3fjCfbBUA_tVqg2W4D3B0D9aF9Hh8Rf0o9vA AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
Reply-To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com


> The problem is that there are hundreds or even thousands of
> different resistors in my database. I could choose a thru-hole part
> for packaging only to have the pcb layout engineer change it to
> surface mount part or inline sip or dip array. Those changes would
> have to be backannotated from PC layout to the original schematic.
> 
> So here's the problem. You frequently have to take one design into
> multiple PCB's. Your schematic will be used in the real product so
> it must be nice and compact with all surface mount parts. You will
> also use the same schematic to build a "break-out-board" with
> thru-hole parts for testing and code development.

This might be a case where a BOM drives the tools, instead of being an
output file.  Multiple "input BOMs" could be maintained by different
groups and merged as part of the process that generates the final
PCAs.

And by BOM I mean "any data that helps narrow down the part selection"
- it could be a physical list or regex's, rule set, or database of
attribute preferences.  Whatever :-)

My blue sky proposal included the option of "some rule set" which I
never defined, which provides project-specific defaults to help narrow
down the list of available parts to the one actually used.  The idea
was that the designer specified what they needed, and the layouter
would pick from the options given.