X-Authentication-Warning:	delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
DKIM-Signature:	v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
	d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
	h=date:from:to:subject:message-id:mail-followup-to:references
	:mime-version:content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to
	:user-agent;
	bh=k2BFO55jbS04WZO0SrWHOQpd0OPsy1VpCu0KQawIHzk=;
	b=ZAJgzb34GzoHUYqPPtyhzQrZT75YmZP0QtvHjMwkQ4NgsaV3Ym/7q1wHB+uZ0f1AWj
	qbyT0RBIt+2kCoxSwQIxbCae4EoxfdO/8Zjry3OCdPpOaE++otBADIhSFAItPb4iyzhB
	9CaxVZHEhvpMFeCdPegVNTqgYDCreJPfNm0S+x0aEy5gTRVcziIK9oycPNh52U4xl8nV
	JkOL+PUfZuzyiFBe20pVPwS1P40sRSW72bApWztWDhq5nMjbmn9SE+/K8M/6QK3hY+rd
	WGVd9sz1pLrvJdr3mbelcp+zIpS4z+lSmC1vDnpvGmRf1RcLALRb5v/A/9DYiAMc946z
	KQNw==
X-Received:	by 10.152.1.168 with SMTP id 8mr4154621lan.74.1392983708504;
	Fri, 21 Feb 2014 03:55:08 -0800 (PST)
Date:	Fri, 21 Feb 2014 15:55:05 +0400
From:	Vladimir Zhbanov <vzhbanov AT gmail DOT com>
To:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Subject:	Re: [geda-user] How unstable is gEDA/gaf 1.9.0?
Message-ID:	<20140221115505.GA25030@localhost.localdomain>
Mail-Followup-To:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
References:	<CAOkiwat+o+GRSRmv4pqYPvuqwEeXa_+A1esiX_DToDcTLsKKZg AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<5305190D DOT 3020507 AT ecosensory DOT com>
	<3Q3 DOT JW8u DOT 3zIDACCYyBi DOT 1J1RgG AT seznam DOT cz>
	<20140220154313 DOT GA28382 AT localhost DOT localdomain>
	<5wu.JWAu.4}M7a1xMt58 DOT 1J1oRu AT seznam DOT cz>
MIME-Version:	1.0
In-Reply-To:	<5wu.JWAu.4}M7a1xMt58.1J1oRu@seznam.cz>
User-Agent:	Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Reply-To:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To:	nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 11:14:16AM +0100, Vaclav Peroutka wrote:
>    Nice, thank you.
>    I'd like to ask one question which is probably more appropriate for
>    geda-devel. How difficult would be patching of nets behaviour when
>    moving components in gschem ?
I have never tried that, so I don't know ;)
There is a long standing request on launchpad:
  https://bugs.launchpad.net/geda/+bug/698801

>    I would like it following way:
>    - if component connected to horizontal net is moved vertically, new
>    vertical net is created connecting the horizontal net to the component
>    - if component connected to vertical net is moved horizontally, new
>    horizontal net is created connecting the vertical net to the component
>    This means that we do not loose orthogonality of nets in the schematic
>    diagram.
There are many questions and corner cases. What should the program
do with multipin symbols, where to break nets and change their
direction. This depends on where and how the nets are connected or
unconnected and how tight the schematic is.

- Raw text -