[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: gEDA-dev: SoC: Gerber, DRC, gsch2pcb and D-BUS

Hi,

I've submitted my two SoC applications. I really have to apologise that they are shorter and less detailed than I intended (and not proof-read well enough). I'm seriously swamped at the moment with an crucial project for my degree (ironically, it involves using gEDA!) that is occupying pretty much my every waking hour.

If I've been unclear about about anything please let me know and I'll clarify.

cheers,
Justyn.


On 23/03/07, Justyn Butler <justynbutler+geda@googlemail.com> wrote:
Thanks for the responses.

I think now I'll submit two proposals for SoC, which gives gEDA several weeks to decide which is more crucial for the summer. It's pretty frustrating because I'd like to work on so many different things.

I'll leave the Gerber converter because it would be implemented as a new, external program. I have an ulterior motive - I'd like to work on PCB itself in some way because it will help (force) me to become very familiar with it's inner workings, so I'll be able to continue coding on it in the future.

My planned proposals:
1) DRC and non-copper layer overhaul.
2) gsch2pcb overhaul including component updating/replacement.

I'll get to work on the formal proposals, and then I'll probably post them here for some feedback if that's OK.

cheers,
Justyn


On 22/03/07, Dan McMahill < dan@mcmahill.net> wrote:
DJ Delorie wrote:
>> On 21/03/07, Dan McMahill <dan@mcmahill.net> wrote:
>>> I'm in favor of a hash signature based on some canonicalized version of
>>> the footprint.  I guess you'd want to embed the hash when the footprint
>>> was first instantiated.
>> Which would be the canonicalized version? The footprint file itself?
>
> Keep in mind that the footprints are modified through placement and
> rotation on the board, plus they can be modified to some extent (like
> renaming pins, or resizing solder masks).  So, it's not the element we
> have *now* that we need to hash, it's the element as it was when we
> loaded it.  The hash would need to ignore, for example, the name,
> refdes, description, order of pin statements, etc.  Simple
> rearrangement of the syntax of the file should not change the hash of
> the element.

Right.  Whitespace changes, equivalent specifications in the different
formats, etc should all be ignored.

-dan



_______________________________________________
geda-dev mailing list
geda-dev@moria.seul.org
http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-dev




_______________________________________________
geda-dev mailing list
geda-dev@moria.seul.org
http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-dev