On Thu, Aug 8, 2013 at 12:12 AM, Dick Hollenbeck <d...@softplc.com> wrote:
> On 08/07/2013 05:25 AM, Chris Morgan wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 6, 2013 at 9:50 PM, Dick Hollenbeck <d...@softplc.com> > wrote: > >> On 08/06/2013 06:40 PM, Chris Morgan wrote: > >>> Hello. > >>> > >>> Sites like http://www.kicadlib.org/ are great for sharing libraries > >>> but I was thinking that having integrated online library sharing could > >>> better distribute the work while making it easier to share and use > >>> parts. A user could add add trusted sources to their remote libraries, > >>> contribute new parts, vote on parts etc. > >>> > >>> Thoughts? It would probably take a bit of effort to spec out and > >>> implement things, I was thinking of an indiegogo or kickstarter > >>> approach to fund the work. > >>> > >>> Chris > >> > >> > >> This has been discussed numerous times, both for eeschema and for > pcbnew. > >> > >> In fact I mentioned it for pcbnew about 4 days ago again. > >> > >> The eeschema conversation is longer, and archives have it already. > >> > > > > I've done a couple of searches like "kicad online library" and "kicad > > network library" that didn't turn up anything. Were different terms > > used in the discussion? > > > SWEET > > This design is one I wrote as a result of endless emails and thinking > about it: > > http://dev.kicad-pcb.org/sweet/ > > In the source tree you find the doxygen source to this design document > named new/design.h > > SWEET is different than PRETTY in that SWEET is designed to be human > writable, human > readable. Whereas PRETTY was intended only to be human readable. > > In the end, I decided that eeschema needed to be rewritten, not adapted. > This is where > you start in a new directory and start over, but are free to copy pieces > from the original > work with scrutiny and refinement as you go. > > It ended up being too much work for me to fund. Get about $100,000 and I > might be > interested in doing the work. Some of it is done already however, the > parser and I > started writing a GAL client before GAL was a good as it is now. > > > Dick Hi Dick. I went through the documents and it looks like an interesting approach to versioning parts. Clearly you've spent a lot of time building that up. I'm wondering if we should consider using a simpler, full part, versioning for the first round of any client/server api. It might not be as efficient but it would likely simplify the implementation and make it easier to move parts around. Chris
_______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
