> >> But the seed idea is growing on me too.
> >
> > Beats python eggs!
>
> There is certainly a smell of coolness. But the entities don't
> act as seedlings.
It was supposed to be a pun. Seed? Grow? :-P
___
geda-user mailing list
geda-user@mor
John Griessen wrote:
>> But the seed idea is growing on me too.
>
> Beats python eggs!
There is certainly a smell of coolness. But the entities don't
act as seedlings. They are not self contained and they don't
unfold into something bigger. Instead, many different of them
are used as buildin
On 05/24/2011 04:02 PM, DJ Delorie wrote:
Mike Bushroe writes:
> As for names, data pack
I like data pack.
But the seed idea is growing on me too.
Beats python eggs! They sound like a natural disaster in Florida...
___
geda-user mailing list
g
Mike Bushroe writes:
> As for names, data pack
I like data pack.
But the seed idea is growing on me too.
(sorry, couldn't resist ;)
___
geda-user mailing list
geda-user@moria.seul.org
http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
I have not been following this closely, so let me make a guess at what
the basics are, and in so doing through my little 2 kopecks worth in.
If there were a combined, heavy library with both circuit element
symbols and footprints contained within a single grouping for a single
device
On Sun, 22 May 2011 11:27:24 -0500
John Griessen wrote:
> On 05/22/2011 10:37 AM, Kai-Martin Knaak wrote:
> > Next try: "packet"
> > This can also contain all kinds of objects. It closely avoids the
> > clash with the meaning of "package" in data sheets.
>
> Packet is a good one. If someone is
On 05/21/2011 11:35 PM, Steven Michalske wrote:
So that wires that have the same meaning are still hooked up
but new pins are unconnected, or old pins that no longer exist are now
not connected.
The other wish list ideas sound like where we are headed, but this last is
probably beyond coder cap
On 05/22/2011 10:37 AM, Kai-Martin Knaak wrote:
Next try: "packet"
This can also contain all kinds of objects. It closely avoids the
clash with the meaning of "package" in data sheets.
Packet is a good one. If someone is confused they can be told library packet,
or see it is in library contex
John Griessen wrote:
> I think the name package could create confusion
> with layout package used to implement a circuit,
I proposed "package" because eagle uses this term for a very similar
concept. Yes, package already has a distinct meaning in the context
of electronics. I would not be happy
On Sat, May 21, 2011 at 7:53 PM, John Griessen wrote:
> On 05/21/2011 08:09 AM, Kai-Martin Knaak wrote:
>>
>> The notion of packages can be seen as a means to isolate dependencies.
>> Pins in symbols must match pins in footprints. Simulation models are
>> specific to components. Packages provide a
> I like the idea of creating a library group containing all info related
> to a manufactured part or part range.
Library group? Or just a library? (not picking on the name, just
wondering what you think the difference is, or why such a difference
might be needed)
Do we need to be able to grou
11 matches
Mail list logo
