Mail Archives: geda-user/2017/01/08/03:33:09
On Sat, 7 Jan 2017, Britton Kerin (britton DOT kerin AT gmail DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com] wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 11:32 PM, <gedau AT igor2 DOT repo DOT hu> wrote:
>> Hello Sergey,
>>
>> On Sat, 7 Jan 2017, Sergey Alyoshin (alyoshin DOT s AT gmail DOT com) [via
>> geda-user AT delorie DOT com] wrote:
>>
>>> Hello Igor,
>>>
>>> On Sat, Jan 7, 2017 at 6:31 AM, <gedau AT igor2 DOT repo DOT hu> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> pcb-rnd 1.1.4 succesfully migrated to Debian testing (a.k.a. Stretch)
>>>> recently. This means Debian users with anything more recent than current
>>>> standle (Jessie) should be able to install pcb-rnd from the official
>>>> repo.
>>>
>>>
>>> Description of pcb-rnd package does not mention relationship with pcb
>>> package, is it intentional?
>>
>>
>> pcb-rnd has added a great amount of complex, large features last year. We
>> also started to have our own file format. We are compatible with pcb, but we
>> are also compatible with kicad - there's no conceptual difference in how we
>> load/save a .pcb file or .kicad_pcb file. The relation of pcb-rnd to pcb is
>> going to be more and more similar to the relation between pcb-rnd and kicad
>> or other packages. From an user's perspective this means pcb-rnd is not a
>> geda/PCB with slightly different config and 2..3 minor improvements (like it
>> was in 2013), but it's more of a totally different layout package.
>
> Sure, but out of courtesy - the same sort of courtesy the people who
> run this list have extended to you in allowing you to use it as you
> have - you should still mention pcb. It's also more honest to users.
> The fact that a piece of software has recently experienced a
> significant fork is an important, both of the fact that there's still
> interest, and of the nature and state of the community. Any new pcb
> release should likewise mention pcb-rnd.
I generally agree. I still regard pcb-rnd as an unofficial part of the
gEDA family, partly because of the common history, partly because of the
workflows supported. Reference to pcb is still in a prominent place on
pcb-rnd's main page so I believe I did everything I could on this.
The Debian description is written and maintained by Dima Kogan. I think
he recently contributed to pcb's packaging too, so he is in the best
position to make cross references, if he thinks it should be done. I am
forwarding your concerns to him.
My personal opinion is that different material need different level of
details. For a Debian package description, as an user, I'm less interested
in the project history. Descriptions would get long and boring for old
projects and it'd be harder to use it to find software of interest with
a quick search.
The current state of mainline on this: pcb's main page doesn't mention any
of the forks or the predecessor (trivia: it was called "router"). Brief
references to the early 90s can be found in the first paragraph of the
history section of the manual, then some more details on mid/late 90s
versions. This part looks good, I don't think the reader of a manual wants
to know much more. However, I think "pcb 3.0" (a.k.a. the tcl/tk fork) is
never mentioned; pcb-rnd neither. Pcb-rnd is mentioned once, on one of the
wiki pages.
Maybe the history section of the manual and/or the 'Links' page could be
extended if you think cross-referencing is important.
Regards,
Igor2
- Raw text -