I'd have said #1, simply as #2 relies on gnetlist, which is being worked
on by various people, at least in design. I can list Steve Meier, Peter
Brett and Myself as those considering new data-structures for libgeda
and the netlister.
But isn't gsch2pcb simply using gnetlist? Whatever happens to the internals of gnetlist, will it affect any work on gsch2pcb?
What exactly is libgeda?
Peter B. and myself are working to design data-structures for netlist
awareness in libgeda, based on Bill Cox's gnetman, and hopefully taking
on board work done by Steve M. in his netlister based on (an old)
libgeda.
We want to retain the scheme backends for output of course, leaving the
project to write the netlist->PCB translation bit as a PCB action script
(the clever bit will be doing updates to an existing schematic), then
push that over DBus.
Sorry but I'm pretty confused by this last paragraph. When you say "the project" do you mean a SoC project, because I thought you were suggesting this shouldn't be attempted given the other work being done in the area?
Lastly you mention D-BUS, what is the status of this in gschem and PCB? What I mean is, what about a SoC project to add more to this area (say in conjunction with gsch2pcb, though as DJ says the script could also still be sent by directly invoking PCB).
On 23/03/07, Timmerman, Bert <bert.timmerman@corusgroup.com> wrote:
The impression I'm getting is that IMHO it would be a good thing to
prioritize the SoC projects, that is, besides the dificulty= attribute
one should add a priority= attribute to visualize the need for the
geda-suite (from the developer community view point).
It seems to me that it is not that easy for gEDA to unanimously agree on what is more important. It is for this reason I would like to submit more than one proposal, if possible, to give more time to decide which to prioritise.
Thanks again for your help.