-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Fri, Jun 08, 2007 at 01:14:28PM -0500, John Griessen wrote: > I can imagine if the netlist contained this uuid by way of being > generated from that schematic, the uuids could become a check of > whether BOMs generated, and schematics edited were still in sync part > by part. If the BOM changed, it changed by using a netlist, and if > the schematic you are looking at is the right one, it has the same > uuid in it as the netlist and the BOM. If you changed a schematic > unnecesarily -- deleting and adding the same component again from a > library, you would need to regenerate netlist and BOM and check the > BOM against the previous one to have all checks pass. Then the BOM > would have a new uuid, but the same part in it... > > Is that your motivation Bernd?
Phew, I hadn't thought about schematic/netlist/BOM consistency at all, but it sounds like a welcome side effect one could implement on top of the uuid's. My motivation for uuid's is only to be able to uniquely and reliably identify a specific COMPLEX (representing: a component, or a "part"). - -- > BTW, sometimes the lack of a specific response indicates *agreement*. Just in case you thought I was agreeing with you. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFGbYD/wyMv24BBd/gRAhrvAJ0Wpv3ZRWD/eEnhT/CV21YsW3n36wCeKL4e DD1qkN4kSfK1/CSaDtDLUtI= =Uyc4 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ geda-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-dev
