kicad-developers team mailing list archive

[Lorenzo Marcantonio <l.marcantonio@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, 21 Jul 2010, Vesa Solonen wrote:

> > I can either keep the numbering as is (which could cause some
> > confusion and some blown components, I think), or I could change
> > the pin numbers to match eeschema - the question is: Are bridge
> > devices special enough to warrant an out-of-order pin numbering ?
> >
> > I would vote yes, as these components (in contrast to lost of other
> > component houses) are used for bridges only, but what do you guys think ?

I *always* make packages to make pins conforming to eeschema. It's most
useful with relays (I call the pins B1,B2,C1,NO1,NC1,C2,...) which go
really wild with pinouts...

I think the trick is finding a good naming convention for pins.

> > On another note, I've also been looking further into
> > the problem that I've had with the KiCad 3D viewer on
> > the new (3D-not-yet-supported) ATI gfx card at home.

I see that driver situation with ATI isn't better these days. My
argument against mandatory opengl rests :P


--
Lorenzo Marcantonio
Logos Srl