gEDA-dev: Roadmap for next release

[Stuart Brorson]

>> 1.  Finish up gEDA project manager.  We dumped the old one, but don't
>> have anything new.  Meanwhile, I continue to see people using the old
>> project manager.
>
> If you mean xgsch2pcb by gEDA project manager, then I'd like to remind
> people of its limited useful scope. It is solely specific to the
> gsch2pcb gschem->PCB workflow.

That's OK since the project manager is used by newbies, who usually
are only interested in the gschem->PCB flow.  More sophistocated users
can always drop to the command line to do what they want.  The idea of
a project manager for newbies is to make it easy for them to do their
projects by offering exactly the functionality required for
gschem->PCB -- no more and no less.

> Hopefully it presents a nice proof of
> concept for that case. Its in Python, so it is not to hard to read and
> extend.

Please remind me where its repository lives.  I'd like to grab a copy
just to fool around.

> A full gEDA project manager was a suggested SoC project. Did anyone take
> up this idea, and would they be prepared to do it in spite not having it
> accepted by Google.

Is there a reason xgsch2pcb can't be inflated to the point it becomes
a full project manager?

>> 2.  Modify/enhance gsch2pcb.  I see two enhancements:

> If you're outputting PCB actions, the location of footprints ought not
> to matter. You could just put the name of the footprint desired into the
> command file, and let PCB find them.

I guess the problem is that I want to use command-line flags to
specify e.g. --elements-dir.  But PCB doesn't share those command-line
flags, as far as I know.  Can I embedd stuff about the footprint
search path into the PCB actions file?  If not, how can I ensure that
gsch2pcb and PCB use the same search paths when looking for
footprints?

Or am I confused?

Stuart