On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 19:42:54 +0100, Stefan Salewski wrote: > When I design electronics, there may be an initial phase where I am > interested only in abstract devices -- no power pins, no pin numbers, no > value, no footprint, no slots.
When I design electronics, I have the opposite need: My library should match my stock of components. That way I don't need to decide on the package of resistors, universal silicon diodes, elcaps or opamps again and again. Adding a symbol for a local stock component should be exactly one mouse click. So I am almost fine with the heavy symbol approach. It is almost fine, because the current heavy symbols lack the ability to preselect a list of default footprints. This would enhance the library with know-how that currently resides in my head. No need to tell students an co-workers which packages to choose... ---<(kaimartin)>--- -- Kai-Martin Knaak Öffentlicher PGP-Schlüssel: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x6C0B9F53 _______________________________________________ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user