X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2013 12:24:48 -0400
Message-Id: <201309101624.r8AGOm7a010555@envy.delorie.com>
From: DJ Delorie <dj AT delorie DOT com>
To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
In-reply-to: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1309101013560.30022@igor2priv>
	(gedau AT igor2 DOT repo DOT hu)
Subject: Re: [geda-user] [RFC] Major changes to symbol/schematic libraries
 in geda-gaf
References: <87ob83dodl DOT fsf AT harrington DOT peter-b DOT co DOT uk> <87sixdi6rc DOT fsf AT harrington DOT peter-b DOT co DOT uk> <4522f5d733a99b250d8ba670a3abae14 AT mail DOT theimps DOT com> <alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 00 DOT 1309101013560 DOT 30022 AT igor2priv>
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
Precedence: bulk


> > - A's library.conf advertises gschem symbols and PCB footprints.  B's
> > advertises symbols only.  Does the "xylophone" library contain symbols,
> > footprints or both?  What does the library selection UI show the user?
> 
> I am not sure I fully understand this. Is the situation that we have a 
> symbol in A and a symbol in B which define the same thing (symbol name 
> match or whatever mechanism is required for this)? Is the question whether 
> in this case B should override A as a file, or attrbiutes merged? If so, 
> both choice looks useful.

The original case I asked to support was different symbols that used
the same named footprint, but had different actual footprints in their
respective libraries.

Mostly this is a defense against the transistor problem.