abair@oakhill.UUCP (Alan Bair) (04/22/89)
In article <10542@rama.UUCP> news@rama.UUCP (Usenet News Admin) writes: >There seems to be no newsgroups devoted to (or even oriented >towards electronic design automation issues like printed circuit >board design, schematic capture, circuit simulation programs, >etc. The closest is comp.lsi.cad, which is IC-design specific, >leaving PCB and hybrid folks out in the cold. > >Here's some suggestions to get the ball rolling: >comp.cad or comp.cadcam - General discussion concerning CAD/CAM/CAE >comp.cad.pcb - Printed Circuit Board design >comp.cad.hybrid - Hybrid circuit design > If this idea stirs any interest, how about bringing the current group into the same newsgroup tree. Change comp.lsi.cad into comp.cad.lsi or for more generality, comp.cad.ic. Now maybe the proposed comp.cad.hybrid is meant to cover all of the IC field, which is fine, but the name is then misleading. If finer divisions are wanted, add subgroups to comp.cad.ic for analog, digital, hybrid, cmos, etc. Though from the traffic I have seen in CAD related groups, this can of group explosion is probably not warranted at this time. Now a type of subdivision that may make more sense would be for schematic, layout, simulation, etc. Well enough for now. Alan Bair SPS C.A.D. Austin, Texas Motorola, Inc. UUCP cs.utexas.edu!oakhill!turbinia!abair
jim@aob.aob.mn.org (Jim Anderson) (04/24/89)
In article <10542@rama.UUCP> news@rama.UUCP (Usenet News Admin) writes: >There seems to be no newsgroups devoted to (or even oriented >towards electronic design automation issues like printed circuit >board design, schematic capture, circuit simulation programs, >etc. The closest is comp.lsi.cad, which is IC-design specific, >leaving PCB and hybrid folks out in the cold. > >Here's some suggestions to get the ball rolling: >comp.cad or comp.cadcam - General discussion concerning CAD/CAM/CAE >comp.cad.pcb - Printed Circuit Board design >comp.cad.hybrid - Hybrid circuit design I would like to see the CAD/CAM groups (if they get created) created as two major groups: comp.cad.mech Mechanical CAD/CAM comp.cad.elec Electrical CAD/CAM The main reason for this is that most of the electronics CAD/CAM are mostly related, as is much of the mechanical related stuff. This also keeps the number of groups minimized, as I don't expect enough traffic to keep a half dozen groups active. Besides, as small as the general traffic related to CAD/CAM is (I haven't seen a half dozen articles in the last year), perhaps a mailing list would be sufficient. -- Jim Anderson (612) 636-2869 Anderson O'Brien, Inc New mail:jim@aob.mn.org 2575 N. Fairview Ave. Old mail:{rutgers,gatech,amdahl}!bungia!aob!jim St. Paul, MN 55113 "Fireball... Let me see... How did that go?"
sparks@corpane.UUCP (John Sparks) (04/25/89)
In article <208@aob.aob.mn.org>, jim@aob.aob.mn.org (Jim Anderson) writes: > I would like to see the CAD/CAM groups (if they get created) created as > two major groups: > comp.cad.mech Mechanical CAD/CAM > comp.cad.elec Electrical CAD/CAM I agree that mechanical and electrical should be separated, but what of ARCHETECTURAL? And CIVIL? Maybe we should start with comp.cad.general and if traffic is great enough THEN we could expand into the various subdivisions. If traffic is light, then the surest way to a quick death would be to make so many sub groups that only a few people use each. And we should always have a .general group to discuss the subjects common to all CAD/CAM/CAEs. One point: before you can make a newsgroup aren't you supposed to have a mail list running for some time to show that there is enough interest? Are there any mailings for CAD? and about renaming comp.lsi.cad: That would be a major undertaking. You have to get every node to change over. Big task. probably not worth the effort. It is much easier to start a new group than to rename one. Thats why we should make sure that if we create a CAD group that we name it right the first time. So if we do make a CAD group let's start with ONE group such as comp.cad.general and let the traffic build for a while and see how many directions teh discussions start taking. Then if need be, we can always petition to create sub groups as they are needed. -- John Sparks | {rutgers|uunet}!ukma!corpane!sparks | D.I.S.K. 24hrs 1200bps [not for RHF] | sparks@corpane.UUCP | 502/968-5401 thru -5406 A virtuous life is its own punishment.
hinojosa@hp-sdd.hp.com (Daniel Hinojosa) (04/26/89)
In article <10542@rama.UUCP> news@rama.UUCP (Usenet News Admin) writes: >There seems to be no newsgroups devoted to (or even oriented >towards electronic design automation issues like printed circuit >board design, schematic capture,[...] >Here's some suggestions to get the ball rolling: >comp.cad or comp.cadcam - General discussion concerning CAD/CAM/CAE >comp.cad.pcb - Printed Circuit Board design >comp.cad.hybrid - Hybrid circuit design >James D. Cronin UUCP: jdc@sc.harris.com or James, I agree. I would like to see all of the above groups created. I am a P.C. Designer/System administrator here and would like to get an overview of what the outside world is up to. Get the ball going and please be sure to keep the header of the subject accurate or similar to CAD/CAM. Regards, -- ==dan=hinojosa================================================================== email - uunet!ucsd!hp-sdd!hinojosa \ / uunet!hplabs!hp-sdd!hinojosa --------------------------------------- ---==(*o*)==--- ---------------------- Jesus saves... but Gretzky gets the rebound! He shoots. HE SCOOORES!!!
deal@kodak.UUCP (Stephen M. Deal) (04/26/89)
>In article <10542@rama.UUCP> news@rama.UUCP (Usenet News Admin) writes: >>Here's some suggestions to get the ball rolling: >>comp.cad or comp.cadcam - General discussion concerning CAD/CAM/CAE >>comp.cad.pcb - Printed Circuit Board design >>comp.cad.hybrid - Hybrid circuit design >In article <208@aob.aob.mn.org> jim@aob.aob.mn.org (Jim Anderson) writes: >I would like to see the CAD/CAM groups (if they get created) created as >two major groups: > comp.cad.mech Mechanical CAD/CAM > comp.cad.elec Electrical CAD/CAM The comp.lsi.cad newsgroup is focused on a specific area of ECAD and does not address the more general aspects of ECAD (e.g. PWB, ASIC). Furthermore (as Jim Anderson states) there are other disciplines that do CAD such as: mechanical, electrical, software, optical, chemical, process... AND each of these does CAE, CAM, CAT... as well in their own special way. Instead of a mailing list, I would suggest a group called: comp.cad This would provide a forum for general CAD/CAM/CAE discussion without the implied constraints that a newsgroup name (e.g. comp.lsi.cad) creates. -- Steve Deal UUCP: ..rutgers!rochester!kodak!deal Disclaimer: "Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, the above is mine and not that of my employer."
gdelong@cvman.UUCP (Gary Delong) (04/26/89)
In article <10542@rama.UUCP>, news@rama.UUCP (Usenet News Admin) writes: > There seems to be no newsgroups devoted to (or even oriented > towards electronic design automation issues like printed circuit > board design, schematic capture, circuit simulation programs, > etc. The closest is comp.lsi.cad, which is IC-design specific, > leaving PCB and hybrid folks out in the cold. > Here's some suggestions to get the ball rolling: > comp.cad or comp.cadcam - General discussion concerning CAD/CAM/CAE > comp.cad.pcb - Printed Circuit Board design > comp.cad.hybrid - Hybrid circuit design > > James D. Cronin UUCP: jdc@sc.harris.com or I've been somewhat supprised that there are no such groups, as well as groups related to mechnical design CAD. I think the reason is probably that most useneters at S/W rather than it's the H/W types who are the normal users of CAD, CAM, CAE, and CIM type systems. I'd support, read, and contribute to such a group if it were formed, but of course I may be a little prejudice in this area. (see .sig) -- _____ / \ / Gary A. Delong, N1BIP "I am the NRA." gdelong@cvman.prime.com | \ / COMPUTERVISION Division {sun|linus}!cvbnet!gdelong \____\/ Prime Computer, Inc. (603) 622-1260 x 261
fargo@pawl.rpi.edu (Irwin M. Fargo) (04/27/89)
I too would be interested in seeing a newsgroup devoted to CAD. As I plan to be doing some design work eventually, might as well find out what I'm in for and how I can do it best. I also agree that we should start with a comp.cad.general group and split it later instead of having multiple groups created at first. Thank you and happy hunting! Actually: Ethan M. Young ____ [> SB <] "Travel IS life" Internet: fargo@pawl.rpi.edu /__ -=>??<=- - Irwin M. Fargo Bitnet (??): usergac0@rpitsmts.bitnet / ARGO : 3000 years of regression from the year 4990
hinojosa@hp-sdd.hp.com (Daniel Hinojosa) (04/27/89)
In article <566@corpane.UUCP> sparks@corpane.UUCP (John Sparks) writes: >In article <208@aob.aob.mn.org>, jim@aob.aob.mn.org (Jim Anderson) writes: >> I would like to see the CAD/CAM groups (if they get created) created as >> two major groups: >> comp.cad.mech Mechanical CAD/CAM >> comp.cad.elec Electrical CAD/CAM >I agree that mechanical and electrical should be separated, but what of >ARCHETECTURAL? And CIVIL? > >So if we do make a CAD group let's start with ONE group such as >comp.cad.general and let the traffic build for a while and see how many >directions teh discussions start taking. Then if need be, we can always >petition to create sub groups as they are needed. The problem I have with this is that I have one particular area of interest. P.C.B. design. I really don't want to have to wade through who knows how many articles bout auto-cad and other subjects not related to my particular disipline. I think in this instance, the various groups should be created. If there is not enough traffic to please the masses, consolidate. -- ==dan=hinojosa================================================================== email - uunet!ucsd!hp-sdd!hinojosa \ / uunet!hplabs!hp-sdd!hinojosa --------------------------------------- ---==(*o*)==--- ---------------------- Jesus saves... but Gretzky gets the rebound! He shoots. HE SCOOORES!!!
sct@a.lanl.gov (Stephen Tenbrink) (04/28/89)
In article <10542@rama.UUCP>, news@rama.UUCP (Usenet News Admin) writes: > There seems to be no newsgroups devoted to (or even oriented > towards electronic design automation issues like printed circuit > board design, schematic capture, circuit simulation programs, I would like to see such a newsgroup. It would/should help prospective purchasers of such equipment get a good idea of what each systems capabilities are. It would also serve as a central point for general CAD discussions for pcb design, simulation, etc.
rja@edison.GE.COM (rja) (05/03/89)
In article <566@corpane.UUCP>, sparks@corpane.UUCP (John Sparks) writes: > So if we do make a CAD group let's start with ONE group such as > comp.cad.general and let the traffic build for a while and see how many > directions teh discussions start taking. Then if need be, we can always > petition to create sub groups as they are needed. The net.custom would be to create comp.cad or comp.cad.misc first. I personally favor the latter name, but most of my concerns about the flattening of the namespace are ignored anyway... rja@edison.cho.ge.com
news@rama.UUCP (Usenet News Admin) (05/15/89)
There seems to be no newsgroups devoted to (or even oriented towards electronic design automation issues like printed circuit board design, schematic capture, circuit simulation programs, etc. The closest is comp.lsi.cad, which is IC-design specific, leaving PCB and hybrid folks out in the cold. Here's some suggestions to get the ball rolling: comp.cad or comp.cadcam - General discussion concerning CAD/CAM/CAE comp.cad.pcb - Printed Circuit Board design comp.cad.hybrid - Hybrid circuit design This list may be extended to any length, although there may not be sufficient interest. James D. Cronin UUCP: jdc@sc.harris.com or Software Engineer ...!rochester!tropix!rama!jdc Defacto News Administrator Harris/Scientific Calculations To discover new lands, one must first be willing to lose sight of shore. -- James D. Cronin UUCP: jdc@sc.harris.com or Software Engineer ...!rochester!tropix!rama!jdc Defacto News Administrator Harris/Scientific Calculations To discover new lands, one must first be willing to lose sight of shore.