Will EAGLE ever get ODB++ support? And when (or why not)?
On 2009-12-11 09:56 Klaus Schmidinger wrote in eagle.suggest.eng:
> Is ODBC the same as ODB++?
> We were in contact with Valor a while ago, regarding the implementation
> of an ODB++ interface. However, despite the fact that they call it an
> "open" format, they require developers to sign an NDA if they want to
> actually use it - and we don't like to sign NDAs...
> Klaus Schmidinger
Well, now my CM (Contract Manufacturer) is now requesting this format.
Quite a few of your competitors now support it.
I also think that NDAs are a fact of life. And it looks like all the
competition -- whether they "like to " sign them or not -- are doing so
to remain competitive and compatible with current and emerging standards.
Since it claims to be "an ASCII open format" I think the real question
might be: can a translator be implemented as ULP without disclosing that
which shouldn't, or can it be a implemented as a plug-in? (Oh, but then
EAGLE doesn't support plug-ins, does it...);