List of propositions for gEDA-versions to come

[Bernhard Krämer]

Hello,

After two days of desperate tries to make one simple circuit with gEDA, I am
nearly giving up. In contrast to Protel, where the functions are hidden,
gEDA is much better organised, but also much harder to use, especially for
a novice.

At this point, I propose the following changes to be made in future versions
of gEDA. I know that this is perhaps not the best place to post such a
list, but I hope you still appreciate it :

- The menus should be steerable by keyboard. They should disappear when
clicking beside of it.
- The footprints should be assigned for many components at once, by
selecting them and choosing one footprint which will be then assigned for
all.
- Every component should have a footprint by default
- When adding a footprint or whatever, standard should be "show value" and
not "show name&value"
- There should be a footprint-browser in gschem. I could imagine a list of
possibilities that appears while choosing a footprint for a component. This
would spare you to know all footprint-types by heart and even worse, to
have to search for them.
- The preview option in the part-browser should be activated by default.
- After changing the schematics, new parts should appear in the pcb-file and
not in the .new.pcb-file.


Thanks,

Bernhard

 

[Stuart Brorson]

: Hello,

: After two days of desperate tries to make one simple circuit with gEDA, I am
: nearly giving up. In contrast to Protel, where the functions are hidden,
: gEDA is much better organised, but also much harder to use, especially for
: a novice.

: At this point, I propose the following changes to be made in future versions
: of gEDA. I know that this is perhaps not the best place to post such a
: list, but I hope you still appreciate it :

Constructive criticism and ideas are always of interest!

: - The menus should be steerable by keyboard. They should disappear when
: clicking beside of it.

If you mean that the menus pop open when you type the corresponding
keyboard shortcut, this is an interesting idea.

: - The footprints should be assigned for many components at once, by
: selecting them and choosing one footprint which will be then assigned for
: all.

Use "gattrib" to do bulk editing of footprints and other attributes.
It presents your design as a spreadsheet components and their
attributes. Here's a screenshot:

http://www.brorson.com/gEDA/gattrib/

Don't download gattrib from that site -- use the gattrib version off
the CD.

The issue with footprints comes up often, especially with newbies.

The gEDA philosophy is minimalist w.r.t. footprints and other
attributes. That is, the component symbols aren't pre-loaded with
footprint attributes. It's up to the user to make the assignment of
the footprint names. This is the case for several reasons:

* Each user may have his own names for the footprints.

* Many common parts have multiple footprints for the same schematic
symbol. Examples include most passives (e.g. 1K resistor in
through-hole version, SMT of various sizes). Instead of having one
symbol for each 0402, 0603, 0805, 1206, etc, you just assign the
footprint you want at design time.

* It's just evolved that way. Building and maintaing symbol and
footprint libs is not glamorous work, so nobody volunteers to do
that. INstead, folks using the tools just get used to rolling their
own. That's what pros do anyway -- they roll their own footprints and
symbol at least 80% of the time.

That having been said, one member of the gEDA community was going to
produce a CD containing a professional quality symbol and footprint
lib, and then sell the CD. He seems to have dropped the project
recently. In any event, the question is: how much would you pay for
such a product anyway?

: - Every component should have a footprint by default

See above. Defaults are good for newbies, but bad for experienced
folks who have their own footprint libs and don't want the default
values. Yes, defaults can be replaced, but you can get bitten if you
forget to do the replacement. With no default, the DRC checker tells
you to install a footprint.

: - When adding a footprint or whatever, standard should be "show value" and
: not "show name&value"

INteresting suggestion. I agree. I can look at this.

: - There should be a footprint-browser in gschem. I could imagine a list of
: possibilities that appears while choosing a footprint for a component. This
: would spare you to know all footprint-types by heart and even worse, to
: have to search for them.

This idea has been suggested before. It's a good one.

: - The preview option in the part-browser should be activated by default.

I can fix that.

: - After changing the schematics, new parts should appear in the pcb-file and
: not in the .new.pcb-file.

Yeah, I'm not sure why it was architected to work like this. . . .

Stuart

 

[Joel Kolstad]

Stuart,

I think you make a lot of good points regarding configuring gEDA for newbies
vs. experienced users. I've found that -- with some effort -- software can
often cater to both users just about equally. My comments (not all of them
reflect this particular comment):

Use "gattrib" to do bulk editing of footprints and other attributes.
It presents your design as a spreadsheet components and their
attributes.

If you integrated that into gEDA itself, it'd probably make everyone happy
(...and look a lot like ORCAD!). All the schematic capture/PCB layout
programs seem to have their own 'paradigm' for performing bulk editing, but in
general all the commercial programs can do it within the program itself. (In
fact, one of Protel's selling points was that ALL the 'editors' ran without
one window -- that might be going a little overboard, but I can certainly see
the appeal).

That having been said, one member of the gEDA community was going to
produce a CD containing a professional quality symbol and footprint
lib, and then sell the CD. He seems to have dropped the project
recently. In any event, the question is: how much would you pay for
such a product anyway?

$39.95? Probably not worth the guy's time, but still, if he's planning on
putting in the effort anyway, any extra income is nice.

: - Every component should have a footprint by default

See above. Defaults are good for newbies, but bad for experienced
folks who have their own footprint libs and don't want the default
values.

So have a checkbox labeled something like "Substitute generic footprint for
parts without them," (and perhaps have the DRC checker issue a warning rather
than an error when a part doesn't have one).

: - When adding a footprint or whatever, standard should be "show value" and
: not "show name&value"

INteresting suggestion. I agree. I can look at this.

Why not just get the preference to be remembered? Have a checkbox for "make
these the default preferences" each time the dialog comes up.

---Joel Kolstad

 

[Paul Burke]

Use "gattrib" to do bulk editing of footprints and other attributes.
It presents your design as a spreadsheet components and their
attributes. Here's a screenshot:

I don't like to seem negative, but this naming business is a big failing
of the Linux community. Instead of a descriptive name that goes some way
to telling you what it's for, there's a tendency for names that are
purely functional (after all, everything's got to be called something)
or cleverish acronyms that can be disastrously misleading. I recently
had a problem over the tip terminal program. Needed to use it, but could
I find any documentation for it? man tip with my installation produces
no results, and a web search for 'tip'... well, guess.

Paul Burke

 

[[email protected]]

Stuart Brorson a écrit :

Constructive criticism and ideas are always of interest!

I am very pleased to hear that! So you are a programmer who really cares
about his baby

: - The menus should be steerable by keyboard. They should disappear when
: clicking beside of it.

If you mean that the menus pop open when you type the corresponding
keyboard shortcut, this is an interesting idea.

Actually, it wasn't that what I meant. In fact, I am used to menus as
everywhere in the Linux
and Windows world: For example you click on "Size" and the menu "Size"
appears. If you
realize that instead of "Size" you wanted to go into the menu "Edit",
you click on "Edit" and
"Edit" appears immediatly. This doesn't work yet. Also, if you realize
that you didn't want to
go in the menu at all, you click anywhere else on the screen and the
menu should disappear.
What I meant with "steerable by keyboard": Yes, it might be interesting
to open it by
keyboard shortcuts. Furthermore, it would be very nice to steer in the
menu with the arrow keys.

Honestly, I like the gEDA interface very much for its speed. I can use
gEDA in the same way
on my old Pentium I Notebook as on my Athlon Palomino. But on the other
hand, the way the
menus and so behave is outdated and very difficult for novices and for
occasional use. I think
this is a point where many users turn away from gEDA. This and the fact
that the footprint
system is still based on the old m4-system.In my layout, all the
polarised components have been
reversed and I think it is because m4 is no more maintained correctly.
Such a thing /should never
happen/ and if I could contribute a bit, being a non-programmer but
interested in well working
Open Source Programs, I would do it.

So my question: Could it be possible that all motivated gEDA-users
conceive a roadmap for a
new, modern interface and symbol/footprint system, and then program it
while keeping all useful,
already programmed internals? So instead of hacking around it, they
would create a great, integrated
Electronic Design Software. The base for that project exists already
with gEDA. Compared to
professional software like Protel, gEDA can do almost the same things
and often even better.
If the interface would be modern and intuitive and if the
footprint/symbol system behind would be
coherent, why should they still use other software?

: - The footprints should be assigned for many components at once, by
: selecting them and choosing one footprint which will be then assigned for
: all.

Use "gattrib" to do bulk editing of footprints and other attributes.
It presents your design as a spreadsheet components and their
attributes. Here's a screenshot:

Fine thing.

The gEDA philosophy is minimalist w.r.t. footprints and other
attributes. That is, the component symbols aren't pre-loaded with
footprint attributes. It's up to the user to make the assignment of
the footprint names. This is the case for several reasons:

* Each user may have his own names for the footprints.

* Many common parts have multiple footprints for the same schematic
symbol. Examples include most passives (e.g. 1K resistor in
through-hole version, SMT of various sizes). Instead of having one
symbol for each 0402, 0603, 0805, 1206, etc, you just assign the
footprint you want at design time.

* It's just evolved that way. Building and maintaing symbol and
footprint libs is not glamorous work, so nobody volunteers to do
that. INstead, folks using the tools just get used to rolling their
own. That's what pros do anyway -- they roll their own footprints and
symbol at least 80% of the time.

That is all true. What do you think about the following:
First, you install gEDA. Every part has a default footprint. But you
always can attribute a new
default footprint.

That having been said, one member of the gEDA community was going to
produce a CD containing a professional quality symbol and footprint
lib, and then sell the CD. He seems to have dropped the project
recently. In any event, the question is: how much would you pay for
such a product anyway?

I don't know if I would pay for the CD if all the software would be free
and especially if I am an
occasional or a new user. And then, if I was a professional every-day
user, I agree that then I would
have create my own symbols. No, I think that the geda-symbols-repository
is a much more
valuable thing.

Best,

Bernhard

 

[Chuck Harris]

I don't like to seem negative, but this naming business is a big failing
of the Linux community. Instead of a descriptive name that goes some way
to telling you what it's for, there's a tendency for names that are
purely functional (after all, everything's got to be called something)
or cleverish acronyms that can be disastrously misleading. I recently
had a problem over the tip terminal program. Needed to use it, but could
I find any documentation for it? man tip with my installation produces
no results, and a web search for 'tip'... well, guess.

Paul Burke

tip is usually spelled: kermit on most linux machines ;-) I don't think
I have seen tip since I used to work on sunos machines.

I am pretty sure that you can directly use the standard xterm window by
piping something (cat maybe?) to and from the appropriate /dev/ttyS.

I've always used kermit.

-Chuck

 

[JeffM]

That having been said, one member of the gEDA community was going to

$39.95? Probably not worth the guy's time, but still,
if he's planning on putting in the effort anyway,
any extra income is nice.
Joel Kolstad

Would it fall under the GPL (or LGPL)?
Seems to me, you're right about the
as-long-as-you're-doing-it-anyway thing.