| ID: | 5729 |
| From: | Robert Neal <in...@inspect.house> |
| Date: | Fri, 8 Jul 2022 17:43:09 -0500 |
| Subject: | Re: [pcb-rnd] file name policy change proposal |
| in-reply-to: | 5728 from John Griessen <jo...@cibolo.com> |
For my 2 cents: I like .rsch and .rpcb=20 With that said: hopefully there would be a lot of overlap between any user t= hat starts a new board design from the command line (few) and a user that wo= uld figure out the behavior of format detection and saving. > On Jul 8, 2022, at 2:43 PM, John Griessen <john@cibolo.com> wrote: >=20 > =EF=BB=BFOn 7/8/22 11:23, Bdale Garbee wrote: >> f the default file name creation in the relevant case yields a >> file ending in .pcb that contains lihata content, that makes things more >> complicated for those of us with structured Makefile includes that think >> they know what a .pcb means. >=20 > Right. That's what I was thinking of also, not from the perspective of cr= eating a new file, but reuse in general. >=20 >=20 > On 7/8/22 11:36, rnd2@igor2.repo.hu wrote: > > In what situation would you name your initial file foo.pcb when running > > pcb-rnd instead of foo.lht knowing your Makefile expects foo.lht for > > lihata? >=20 > Probably that would not happen. But if foo.pcb starts to mean based on li= hata structure, then it is a confusion for old makefiles. >=20 >=20 >=20 > > > > Or are you trying to create a geda/pcb file using pcb-rnd? (Why?) >=20 > That could happen when making examples for customers to use with geda, but= is easy to do > without confusion. >=20 > And if > > so, isn't "save as" a better/safer option if you explicitly want to make= > > sure you start a new file in an alien format >=20 > Sure. >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20
Reply subtree:
5729 Re: [pcb-rnd] file name policy change proposal from Robert Neal <in...@inspect.house>