| ID: | 5696 |
| From: | Nicklas SB Karlsson <nk...@nksb.eu> |
| Date: | Fri, 17 Jun 2022 09:38:04 +0200 |
| Subject: | Re: [pcb-rnd] RFC: project file considerations |
| in-reply-to: | 5684 from rn...@igor2.repo.hu |
Are a little bit uncertain maybe MS but have a use case or cases from gschem/lepton. Have several schematics with hierarchical design sometimes several levels. Sometimes top level is same between several cards because they have connectors interfacing to other cards. In other cases some circuit is reused, this may be because several channels are used with same layout on circuit board but may also be reuse between circuit boards so that schematic is used on several boards. This work relatively well in gschem/lepton. Sometimes I have used ordinary soft links on file system to reference schematics supposed to be same then there is variants of schematics. It is very common to put a step down regulator on a circuit board, reuse of both schematic and layout make sense. Nicklas Karlsson Den 2022-06-09 kl. 09:01, skrev rnd2@igor2.repo.hu: > Hi all, > > this is going to be a thread about comments on a very specific set of > proposals being implemented in sch-rnd. I am posting it here because it > will affect Ringdove as a whole, including pcb-rnd later. > > This is NOT a write-only thread: please DO READ ALL MATERIAL BEFORE > REPLYING. Please write only if you first invest the time to really > understand the topic. (If you can't afford the time to read the material, > thats' fine, just don't reply then.) > > I am not interested in generic opinions about project files, I am > interested in comments on details of these specific documents. So please > think in the frame of these documents, using the terminology of these > documents - that's the only way to contribute to them. Starting some > random brainstorming from scratch "because it's related" won't add > anything but noise. > > There are two documents that need review and comments. > > First, this one explains all the different ways we could related to > project files (so it's background theory), within certain > assumptions/limitations explained in the abstract: > > http://repo.hu/cgi-bin/pool.cgi?project=sch-rnd-aux&cmd=show&node=prj_archs > > > Then this one, building on the above, explains the implementation and > practical scenarios I am experimenting with in sch-rnd: > > http://repo.hu/cgi-bin/pool.cgi?project=sch-rnd-aux&cmd=show&node=prj_corners > > > > What I am interested in: > > - if any of these specific ideas would conflict with how you already use > your favorite sch editor (in case you consider switching to sch-rnd) > > - if any of these specific ideas would conflict with how you already use > pcb-rnd (in case later I implemnet the same thing pcb-rnd) > > - if there is any trivial, natural feature/scenario missing from the > current design (prj_corners) that _you_ actually need > > - as always, I am interested in YOUR use cases, not in "whatever you can > imagine" or "something that you don't need but could be useful in general > or for someone else" > > > Best regards, > > Igor2 > > > >
Reply subtree:
5696 Re: [pcb-rnd] RFC: project file considerations from Nicklas SB Karlsson <nk...@nksb.eu>